PDA

View Full Version : Which is more evil ?



globe
22-07-2012, 02:13 PM
Google (google the corp not google plus) or facebook ?

I can't make up my mind, but I'm leaning towards Google (specifically if you have a gmail rather than plus)

Iantech
22-07-2012, 02:33 PM
Based on what?

Nick G
22-07-2012, 02:38 PM
farcebook. What makes you say google?

globe
22-07-2012, 02:48 PM
Based on what?

up to you.

I haven't looked into this much but I just get the feeling Google gather way more info about you and use that more than FB ever have (to date).

Metla
22-07-2012, 04:07 PM
I'm going to vote for religion, with the Catholics getting a special nod.

Myth
22-07-2012, 04:12 PM
People who breathe...

Proven fact that people who don't breathe are not evil

stratex5
22-07-2012, 04:13 PM
People who breathe...

Proven fact that people who don't breathe are not evil

What a myth:D

Metla
22-07-2012, 04:15 PM
People who breathe...

Proven fact that people who don't breathe are not evil

Vampires

Zombies

Myth
22-07-2012, 04:17 PM
Vampires

ZombiesThey're only real in your world.
My world consists of Fathers and Alter Boys

icow
22-07-2012, 04:42 PM
I vote EA.

gary67
22-07-2012, 06:01 PM
farcebook is currently leading the evil stakes, closely followed by Apple, Microsoft and finally a distant way back Google and very last Linux

plod
22-07-2012, 06:05 PM
farcebook is currently leading the evil stakes, closely followed by Apple, Microsoft and finally a distant way back Google and very last LinuxWell at least apple and ms are upfront about being evil, as for google. There is no such thing as a free lunch

lakewoodlady
22-07-2012, 06:24 PM
Well at least apple and ms are upfront about being evil, as for google. There is no such thing as a free lunch

Unless it is an evil lunch..........

LL

8ftmetalhaed
22-07-2012, 07:29 PM
I really like google. Not such a fan of facebook, but then I use facebook and don't have a google plus account. If it's collecting advertising data on me then let them do so, as long as the service they provide is worthwhile, and they tell me they're doing it to some degree. More power to them, if they choose to advertise at me about things I might be slightly more likely to click (but still won't) as opposed to random crap that has no bearing on me at all.

Companies that have on disc DLC, or overly restrictive DRM, or really, really bad pricing structures, or fail and then come up with shitty excuses (IE blizzard and D3's server issues, IE apple and the iphone 4's reception issues, IE flash and its crappy performance, etc etc) then I'll automatically hate them because reasons. Oh and capcom releasing street fighter 4 4 times with a different title each time and the 'new content' amounting to nothing more than bug fixes and a couple extra characters. Plus the whole on disc DLC thing.

The Error Guy
23-07-2012, 11:19 AM
Google is a tad more open, yes they use info but purely for ads... what I don't like is the way facebook interacts on a deep deep personal level. Their use of info is mysterious. I hate their snooping. Their android app does some dodgy things, not to mention wanting to add your location to everything.

R2x1
23-07-2012, 12:29 PM
Google has a use, fbook is just a source of rectal distress. Or, vice-versa if that is your view.

pctek
23-07-2012, 01:14 PM
I'm going to vote for religion.

+1

1101
23-07-2012, 01:26 PM
Lets see, what company took there little cars around the world & 'listened in' on every unsecured wifi signal they could find, collecting private data.

I think if you or I tried that we'd risk jail-time.

globe
23-07-2012, 09:34 PM
Lets see, what company took there little cars around the world & 'listened in' on every unsecured wifi signal they could find, collecting private data.

I think if you or I tried that we'd risk jail-time.
Exactly

plod
23-07-2012, 09:41 PM
Lets see, what company took there little cars around the world & 'listened in' on every unsecured wifi signal they could find, collecting private data.

I think if you or I tried that we'd risk jail-time.Yeah, but ummm.

Metla
23-07-2012, 09:52 PM
Yeah, Thats right up there with downing women for witchcraft, burning heretics, and building an entire system so to supply children to pedophiles.

Of course, we would all go to jail for that as well.

8ftmetalhaed
23-07-2012, 10:20 PM
As I recall that was unintended acquisition by google. When I see bills on my credit card statements for 'Android app development' or something I'll be worried. Till then, not so much.

McRuff
23-07-2012, 11:32 PM
I think Microsoft should get a special mention, it is not there yet. But is trying hard to copy Apples Evil plan for world domination. I wonder if Apple has patented their Plan and can sue them.

Agent_24
24-07-2012, 12:51 AM
I would pick Google, because I don't use Farcebook.

Google recently bought and then killed off Meebo messenger which was the best web IM client available.

Also, they like to go around saying "Don't be evil" which is just a complete joke.

R2x1
24-07-2012, 08:24 AM
If the title was "Witch is more evil", I would agree, And more evil than everything, but still the Jonkey makes her a Minister.

It's hard sitting here, perfect in every way, watching the little people blundering about. ;)

Gobe1
24-07-2012, 12:34 PM
Facebook for me and Blizzard for making a game online access even for single player :arrrgh:

mikebartnz
25-07-2012, 11:30 AM
Lets see, what company took there little cars around the world & 'listened in' on every unsecured wifi signal they could find, collecting private data.

I think if you or I tried that we'd risk jail-time.
If anyone is dumb enough not to secure their network if they don't intend it to be open they only have themselves to blame.
Wouldn't it be great if all wireless networks were open.

Metla
25-07-2012, 11:34 AM
If anyone is dumb enough not to secure their network if they don't intend it to be open they only have themselves to blame.
Wouldn't it be great if all wireless networks were open.


Damn right, and if anyone steals from your house its your fault for not welding steel plate over the windows.

When will honest people understand that they are in the wrong for the dishonest unethical actions of others?

Agent_24
25-07-2012, 12:07 PM
Yeah, some people don't actually understand that WiFi even needs security...

Chilling_Silence
25-07-2012, 01:39 PM
True, however it's like saying that you're responsible for walking past somebody in a cafe and overhearing them talking about confidential figures.
It's piss easy to setup a Wifi card in promiscuous mode and just have it dump pcaps of everything to analyze it all later.

Also, anybody seen this before? It's quite funny, the very thing a corporation once stood against, is the very thing they've become the embodiment of: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8

Metla
25-07-2012, 01:46 PM
True, however it's like saying that you're responsible for walking past somebody in a cafe and overhearing them talking about confidential figures.


Well no, Its nothing like that at all, Its like putting a microphone in a private booth, recording every word and then blaming the people who were recorded for not speaking in code.

Cicero
25-07-2012, 01:53 PM
I'm going to vote for religion, with the Catholics getting a special nod.

The islamic fundamentalist are a nasty lot too.

Chilling_Silence
25-07-2012, 01:59 PM
Well no, Its nothing like that at all, Its like putting a microphone in a private booth, recording every word and then blaming the people who were recorded for not speaking in code.

How so? A wifi network isn't a private booth by any stretch of the imagination. Just like sitting in your front lawn isn't completely private from people walking past...

Metla
25-07-2012, 02:15 PM
How so? A wifi network isn't a private booth by any stretch of the imagination. Just like sitting in your front lawn isn't completely private from people walking past...

because you don't just overhear a data on a wifi network without deliberate intent and equipment.

To get it in line with your front lawn concept you would have to write your data on a sign and erect it on the front lawn, Then somebody could quite rightly say they had no intent and took no actions to access the data.

Chilling_Silence
25-07-2012, 02:26 PM
Not entirely.

They absolutely had *every* intent of writing down that that house was at XYZ and who lives there. The rest was basically just laziness on their behalf, not filtering it *as* they captured it. That said, they kinda had to capture it in order to find out the SSIDs of networks that weren't broadcasting their details, so they're kinda damned if they do, damned if they don't ...

gary67
25-07-2012, 02:38 PM
Yeah, Thats right up there with downing women for witchcraft, burning heretics, and building an entire system so to supply children to pedophiles.

Of course, we would all go to jail for that as well.

You need one of these 4024 :devil

1101
26-07-2012, 11:12 AM
How so? A wifi network isn't a private booth by any stretch of the imagination. Just like sitting in your front lawn isn't completely private from people walking past...

eavesdropping ?? Im not sure what the NZ laws are on that.

OK, its more like this
Getting a small telescope, setting in up on top of a van,driving around all the local streets, peering into peoples houses & photographing/videoing what you see .
If anyone thinks its OK to eavesdrop on unsecured wifi, please supply your home address so we can try & hack into your wifi. If we get in its your fault.
In fact, people have been arrested for secretly using someone elses unsecured wifi . Yet Google gets away with this. You cant just accidentally gather data & store from wifi while driving around in a Van.

Why is it illegal to phonetap, yet seemingly OK to to steal(yes steal) private info off unsecured wifi.
Both are easy to do. Both can be protected if you are tech savvy. many are not tech savvy.

Chilling_Silence
26-07-2012, 12:52 PM
Well technically no because the information over WiFi is being broadcast, that's the key difference.

Yes, you can easily gather the data. I drive along and my Cellphone beeps to alert me there are nearby wifi networks. Now how does it know that? Because the information was being broadcast, both that the networks were secure / open as well as their name.

Calls over a physical copper phone line are *not* broadcast by comparison.

Agent_24
26-07-2012, 12:57 PM
Calls over a physical copper phone line are *not* broadcast by comparison.

They are, but with much less power.

The electric current in the phone wiring will cause a small field around the wire you could intercept, if you were close enough.

Chilling_Silence
26-07-2012, 01:33 PM
They are, but with much less power.

The electric current in the phone wiring will cause a small field around the wire you could intercept, if you were close enough.

Fair call, point taken ;)

Metla
26-07-2012, 02:11 PM
There is nothing ethical in accessing someones wifi network without their permission,and the fact it can easily be done is no justification.

Shoplifting is easy if you happen to be that way inclined.

Chilling_Silence
26-07-2012, 02:20 PM
No this is more "You can easily do it without realizing as you do other things" though. As your phone goes along, it also does the same as what Google did (Be it an iPhone, Android or Windows Mobile) however your phone simply filters out everything that is *not* the SSID of an open network that it can connect to.

Agent_24
26-07-2012, 02:31 PM
There is nothing ethical in accessing someones wifi network without their permission,and the fact it can easily be done is no justification.

I don't think people should access other people's networks without permission either, but they need to realise that if they have an unencrypted network then other people can and probably will take a look.

If you leave your house doors wide open you can't complain a whole lot if someone walks in and looks around, because some people will just do that. They shouldn't, but they do.


The funny thing is that is that an unsecured WiFi with the SSID being broadcast is pretty much the same thing as opening all your doors, and standing outside and shouting "HEY, MY HOUSE IS RIGHT HERE AND MY DOORS ARE WIDE OPEN"


What are you going to do? Sue people because they heard you?

Metla
26-07-2012, 03:04 PM
What are you going to do? Sue people because they heard you?

Of course not, i'd rant on the internet....

That aside, If its just down to how easy it is, how does that apply to someone with the skills and hardware to break into a secure network?

An honest person knows its not right to be poking around on another's network, and for good reason.

Anyhow, I'll leave my door to my house open, And If I find someone inside then Mr wooden bat will meet Mr head, And I wont be stopping to ask if they came through an open door, a closed door or a window.

Gobe1
26-07-2012, 03:08 PM
If anyone thinks its OK to eavesdrop on unsecured wifi, please supply your home address so we can try & hack into your wifi. If we get in its your fault.

No, if you give someone permission to eavesdrop it is not eavesdropping anymore, it is listening. Quite different to breaking and entering

Chilling_Silence
26-07-2012, 05:43 PM
If you leave your house doors wide open you can't complain a whole lot if someone walks in and looks around, because some people will just do that. They shouldn't, but they do.

The funny thing is that is that an unsecured WiFi with the SSID being broadcast is pretty much the same thing as opening all your doors, and standing outside and shouting "HEY, MY HOUSE IS RIGHT HERE AND MY DOORS ARE WIDE OPEN"

Well said. I think that's the key difference.... the broadcasting.

1101
30-07-2012, 02:22 PM
http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/7371963/Google-admits-it-did-not-delete-data

hmmn....
'accidently' slurped data
then 'accidently' didnt delete the data as they said they would

evil ??
"Google angered officials on both sides of the Atlantic in 2010 when it acknowledged that its mapping cars, which carried cameras to create three-dimensional maps of the world's streets, had also scooped up passwords and other data being transmitted over unsecured wireless networks. Investigators have since revealed the data included private information, including legal, medical and pornographic material. "

cant blame them for keeping the porn though :banana

not so much an accident either
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/30/google_slurp_ok/
"An investigation by the Federal Communications Commission leaves no ambiguity: an engineer discussed the collection of the personal data with a senior manager, and that between May 2007 and May 2010, wireless traffic was captured by Street View cars."

and a cover up
"“For many months, Google deliberately impeded and delayed the bureau’s investigation by failing to respond to requests for material information and to provide certifications and verifications of its responses,” the FCC wrote.

Chilling_Silence
30-07-2012, 03:17 PM
Wouldn't surprise me if it was a lazy engineer who wanted to analyze the data at a later stage (Or it could have been a thorough engineer trying to do some additional things such as matching IP Ranges on hidden SSID networks etc).

ChazTheGeek
30-07-2012, 05:46 PM
Evil? Hardware prices!!

Nick G
30-07-2012, 06:11 PM
Evil? Hardware prices!!
And that mobile phones don't ship with two batteries be default. :D

ChazTheGeek
30-07-2012, 06:22 PM
Oh and Ebay shipping prices.

afe66
30-07-2012, 06:48 PM
Facebook.

I feel (rightly or wrongly) that I understand what google is going to do.. look at what I am interested and read my gmail to target ads at me for which other people will pay money for. I try to privatise things as much as possible by regular deleting of cookie and refusing them whenever I can. (not perfect I realise).


I'm not sure what facebook intends to do to realise its share price. Their repeated changing of their privacy terms and conditions and the (impression) of sneaky way they do it leaves a bad taste.

Was most disappointed that spotify here in nz needs a facebook login. Nearly a game breaker.
Instead I created a use once facebook account with no friends and every privacy option I could turned off. Also fake name, DOB, and generic web mail addy.

A.