Le 29/05/2014 15:26, Doctor John nous fit lire :
> On 29/05/14 13:13, Le_Forgeron wrote:
>>
>> Is it really unsafe ?
>> Do you really want to trust Google about big data ?
>>
> 
> There is a fundamental problem with the 'net. If we leave it open then
> we allow anyone (not just Google) to reap our data (encrypted or not).
> If we restrict it, then we lose the interconnectivity that Tim
> Berners-Lee and his predecessors envisaged.
> As I see it, it's not a problem of trust but a problem of
> self-censorship; if you don't want someone to access some data about
> you, don't use the 'net to communicate it.

I disagree. Open is not the problem, it's the solution.
Google is not open. My data are that: "Mine". Until i openly grant
someone access to my habit on my system, nobody should try to read it.
But that's not the approach of the other side of the Atlantic Ocean.
"Better apologize than ask permission" is a strong step to try and build
a project. But that's just plain wrong with privacy.

For once, I'm ok with the Dilbert solution (1998 May 07):
> http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1998-05-07/

I just have weak hands... and who could seize google's ankles ?

Later version...
> http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2004-05-31/

I want a life of sheep, but I won't make a treaty with wolves.

-- 
IQ of crossposters with FU: 100 / (number of groups)
IQ of crossposters without FU: 100 / (1 + number of groups)
IQ of multiposters: 100 / ( (number of groups) * (number of groups))

Post a reply to this message