I'm a bit embarrassed to admit it but I don't grasp the significance of this, can you dumb it down for me please?
I am writing to recommend Mr. McFly, a valuable member of Hardwareanalysis.com, to be the new Chief Scripting Programmer / Manager of Google, Inc. It is evident that your script coding was poorly implemented. The continuation of such adulterous coding will be detrimental to the success of the Google corporation. I am confident that Mr. McFly, the author of numerous successful Monkey Scripts, will bring enormous improvement to the Google websites and will push Google light years ahead of other competitors. Thus further affirms Google's dominance in the world.
I also try to remember to copy links from Google and paste them into a new browser tab rather than clicking on the Google-provided links. Now I wonder what the impact will be.
edit to add: BTW, I do this mostly because I don't appreciate Google's intense tracking, but I also believe Google has lost sight of its "Don't be evil." Code of Conduct statement due to its participation in political censorship.
Scroogle does make an exception for links that Google declares are suspected "unsafe" malware sites. However, the only portion of the Google link they let come through to you, is the "interstitial" element that posts the warning about the suspect target site. However when they do, Scroogle also clearly shows this with this warning in Red "Google intercepts this link"
EXAMPLE: a Scroogle search on "Cheddar Caves" returns this link (and others) http://www.gXXgle.com/interstitial?url=http://www.birminghamuk...heddar.htm
All the Google extra tracking gunk has been removed...unless you then go to the Google website.
(note: google site links edited to gXXgle to disable active linkage)
OK, thanks for the clarification. I guess it doesn't bug me too much since I figure, for the most part, they've already tracked anything I search for. I feel like I should be annoyed/concerned/etc but I'm not really.
~Vel (69519) said on Apr 22, 2009 at 07:07pm PDT:
Is this really all that new? To be fair, that's part of how Page Rank works is by tracking which URLs get the most hits off of searches and such, & we've known that Google keeps search logs.
Page Rank relies mostly on how many links to a page exist on other pages, weighted by the ranking of the source page. Me clicking here or there doesn't factor into that aspect.
Hmm, I knew that, I thought the hits still factored in somehow. Interesting.
Google made a choice. Back in the beginning to do business in China they had to agree to major censorship. They could have told the PRC government no. That would have sent a statement to the world as well as impacted finances in the PRC.
If they didn't have "Don't be evil" in their Code of Conduct, it wouldn't be as meaningful. But they do.
IMO they chose money over ethics and human rights at that point in time.
BTW, there are developing claims that Google has been using Cayman Islands tax havens to improperly avoid significant taxes in a number of countries. I fully support legal tax avoidance but the fact they regularly use the questionable Caymans does raise some flags. They certainly aren't the only ones to do this, but there's that pesky "Don't be evil" thing again.
. I hereby nominate McFly for the Nobel Peace-of-Mind prize!!!
You may have to re-think the name. From something I read a few months ago Google is increasingly aggressive re: any adverse reference to its name, including the four letters "Goog".
If "Googicide" doesn't work out, maybe from these alternates?
(in my preferred order)
(because "Goo" could also be interpreted as more generic internet "goo"...stuff that sticks in your computer and/or gums things up. The more generic something can be claimed to be, the less likely trademarks is going to stomp. The only reason it's at the bottom of the list is that it still might be a legally risky name.)
...And thus was born today ... Googicide (thanks once again to Bobby for the name). My new extension which I will be posting to addons.mozilla.org when it's finished....
I won't lie, I'm a little bit of a paranoid person. In my defense (before I'm ruled as a kook), the government has been protecting my civil liberties SO MUCH the last few years, I can't help but think that I'm about to ditch conventional instant messaging and, indeed, conventional internet services for ones that offer anonymous and encrypted communications...
I've been leary of Google from day one.
I'm more of a gopher, and archie type of internet searcher (look them up you n00bs!).
Google IS NOT a search engine. It is a cataloger. It does do internet searches, but ONLY to catalog the information. When you search the google catalog, you are getting information as FILTERED and PRIOTORIZED by them, not the actual internet site hits.
It is a for profit entity that doesnt' charge you directly, so it must charge indirectly. The chances of you clicking an add on a Google page is minimal, so the only way they can make money is to collect your information and either sell it, or use it to target adds to your behaviour.
Google reminds me of the BNL corporation in the WALL-E movie.
I've used scroogle.org for years, and for my everyday searches I use DogPile.com.
Fewer cookies, more catalogs, fewer advertisements.
Ad Astra Per Aspera
(A rough road leads to the Stars)
We all know what we know, and everyone else knows we are wrong.
System Specifications in BIO