posting a letter and posting on the internet, apples and oranges, not even able to compare.

Thing is, I was there and Yahoo produced no such results... none relating to his other children or criminal record, just a couple of references to his employment, etc.  That suggests to me that Yahoo has better standards and is more selective regarding the use of information it discovers.

Ok, so it's not the mail, I know that.  However, he was a paying member to a site for members only... where the business end of things happens behind closed doors, so to speak.  To access anything behind the front page and various teasers, one has to become a member.  So in effect, then, he was posting within a closed community to certain individuals, yet his information there was somehow accessed and made (more) public.  Moreover, Google added ads for sex toy and sex services to the page, and this helped create a less than flattering profile for viewers of that page by sexualising it.  Yup, he was pretty ropable.

I remember it well because there was an almighty row a couple of days later.. he didn't want my niece knowing those things about him and wondered how she came by the information. He was told and then he revealed to us that his personal data/profile at this particular dating site must have been accessed as it was the only place on the net he had posted those details.

Oh well, I didn't like the bastard anyhow... but it is the principle of the thing.  Just because it is there, it doesn't make it right to use somebody elses personal information to turn a profit.... particularly without consent.

So by this you are saying that Google is supposed to access peoples personal lives and make them available to the wider public??

It is not a matter of whether they can access and use it publicly to seek profit (just because it happens the be there) but if they should, and from a moral and ethical standpoint, they should NOT.  It's no different to somebody on a public street finding a letter you wrote to a colleague, relative or even an illicit lover and posting it in your local newspaper.  Sure it was found in a public place... BUT, it is your information to an intended recipient, not the wider community.

Orright, let's put it another way!  If I download a cracked version of WindowBlinds from a warez site simply because it is there on the internet, does its 'being there' make it right???  Of course not.  Forget about patents and copyrights, it is somebody else's property and not mine to take... just as my ex-brother-in-law's memoirs, bragging whatever were not Google's property to take.

I make no apologies for not liking Google... non whatsoever!  I think Google is lower than pond scum and has far fewer morals and scruples than a devil worshippiing adulterous murderer who sacrifices virgins and small children.

Starkers, I don't mean to sound rude or anything like that, but you are totaly off topic from the very begining of this thread, so either make a comment about Google Chrome OS or Windows (that's what this thread is all about) or don't comment at all.

What starkers says (truth btw) is relevant to the OS because if you can't trust google search, gmail, etc... (and you can't) then how are you supposed to trust their OS?

I dont think morals and ethics belong on the internet as a whole, keep it open to all bad or good, thats what have made it to what it is today. Sure enforce your morals and ethics on your site/community/forum/irc etc.. there they should apply where you are the king of your own island. Because not all have the same morals and ethics i mean why should we not follow a hardcore islamic activist's/kkk/conservative christian/buddhist monk/cartel leader ethic's instead of "yours".

If you have something you dont want anyone to know DONT post it on the internet...... simple...
If you write an opinion or info make sure you can stand tall for it.

Its the same as dont write your pin on your creditcard and leave it with your id.

If Google can access it then its the sites problem you can exclude pages from googles crawlers, its easy.

The robots.txt file can be used to stop a search engine spider from crawling all or part of your site. Create a robots.txt file in the main folder of your site which will direct the search engine spiders what they may and may not search. Spiders generally look for this file before doing anything.

So using a site that gives out confidential info could be equal to using a mechanic that puts diesel in your petrol car.. incompetent.

Orright, then, the Google OS can NOT be trusted because it's Google's practice to monitor your comings, goings and whereabouts, so it will phone home so that you can be targetted with ads.  Google's OS will most likely support ads somewhere within its GUI and there will most likely be no opt out because they will be hard coded so that programs like AdBlock Pro and NoScript are ineffective.

Also, Googles Chrome OS would become a lame duck when your internet connection was down and or when the 'cloud' was either undergoing maintenance or was experiencing tenchnical difficulties.  Furthermore, Google's cloud based OS could not host resource intensive programs for graphics creation/editing (Photoshop PSP) or anything that captures/edits video and or music, so people wanting to do some serious work on it would find it as useless as tits on a bull.

Better????

There might be a problem there... bull=male... so i guess it would be a belgian blue with commonly refered to as "bitch tits"??

And you take a bite first not me

http://desktop.google.com/

Expect this to be on the desktop of GoogleOS

It searchers and index files on your computer ...

Ahhh ok!    never had the pleasure of owning a pair so im not familiar with the terminology

Starkers I don't know why you are rehashing everything you have typed before. What happened to you with Google is not a typical situation.

In the end you are not going to change anyone's mind here. We will still continue to use Google search and Gmail.

Imagine if we quit using Windowblinds because one little thing about it wasn't right or made us angry and then never came back? Google still has a great search engine and Gmail is great.

And we will continue to sigh because you can't seem to drop it and admit that any search engine could have done the same thing.

Open your eyes. See the big picture. Google is just part of a bigger problem.

here ya go Zubuz

Exactly!  I mean, who in their right mind would give Google's phone home apps access to their files?  As it is, Google already has way too much power to intrude with its google-analytics every time your go on the net... a 'cloud' based OS with access to PC and personal files should be the last thing anyone would want, given Google's insatiable greed for data and the profit it derives from it.

Nor was what happened to my former brother-in law (not me) and isolated incident.  There have been numerous complaints over the years of Google overstepping the realms of decency regarding peoples privacy/personal information.  The fact is, Google is intrusive/invasive and it knows/accepts no boundaries.  There was no point... um, need for Google to collect that information on my former brother-in-law, then create a page on it.  It probably has interest to about half a dozen people at best, so what was the point... other than for Google to profit from the associated ads?

Sigh all you want!   The fact is, Yahoo did not produce those results, nor the sex toy ads.  It probably could have, but Yahoo refrained and didn't stoop so low.

Ah, finally, at least now you're admitting that Google IS a problem!  However, while Google is a part of the problem, as you say, Google exacerbates ithe problem considerably by going out of its way to collect as much data as it can (personal or otherwise, doesn't matter to them) to propogate more 'associated' ads to more people... the greater majority of whom are annoyed the crap out of by persistent (non-opt out of) ads popping up everywhere they go.

As for opening my eyes, well you need to do the same.  You pay more for products and services as a direct result of Google (and other) advertising... as do we all.  Contrary to popular belief... what Google will try to tell you, advertising does not significantly help improve sales/reduce prices. 

Need is the trigger to buy... not advertising, and being that most people are pissed at constant/frequent/in-your-face advertising, it is need that generates sales, not ads. For example, how many ads do you completely ignore because you have no want or need of the advertised product/service???  Exactly!  And you're not on your own there... billions ignore ads all the time... and many of those, like me, go out of their way to avoid them where ever possible.

Furthermore, the costs of advertising are horrendous (advertising execs are among the highest paid people in the World) and those costs are passed on to the consumer... you and I.  Does Google care about this... that associated advertising costs have priced us out of several consumer markets?  No, of course not, not while they're raking in 5 billion plus in net annual profit.

No, I disagree!  That may be the way it is, but once you compromise in one area of morality/scruples/ethics, then you lower the standard in all areas.  It effectively loewers our standards... and on the internet, that's when kiddie porn, terrorist and other criminal/anti-social sites can propogate/thrive with near immunity.  Given rising crime rates world-wide, muderers, rapists and child molesters being released from prison after grossly inadequate sentences, NO!  Our standards need lifting, not lowering.

Being as poor as I am that isn't possible. Top that off with Google ads are blocked.

As for your little comment about Yahoo you do know they are not as through on searches as Google right?

And once again you still don't get it. You blame Google for what happened to your ex brother in law. Guess what? Any other search engine COULD have done the same thing. This is NOT limited to just Google. Why can't you see that?

As I said though - your not going to change anyone's mind about using Google so you might as well give up.

As for the rest of your drivel your just beating a dead horse as we all know better. Your one bad experience dosen't make Google a bad company.

MS themselves have done bad things. Do you still use Windows even in spite of this?

Wise up. Admit this could have happened via another search engine.

Google STILL has the best search engine on the net. And earning money from ads is NOT a crime.

By the way I did a Google search on you. It came back with your personal info thanks to Wincustomize. No one to blame about data mining but yourself for posting it.

Ah, but you wouldn't be so poor if prices weren't hiked up as high through associated advertising costs... your dollar would go further without advertising cost.

Is that because your dollar doesn't go very far and you get green with envy at all them loverly things you can't afford ... or because you hate internet ads as much as I do???

Ah, but I do get it!  It's not about what they can do, but what they actually do. Sure, any other search engine could have produced those results... but none did.  That says to me that Google completely lacks integrity and is morally corrupt.

You know better, eh!  You know, then, that Google won't sell your information (something that is sensitive and possibly detrimental to your well-being) to the highest bidder... anyone willing to hand 'em a buck???  Don't be so naive as to think they never would... they're in the business of profitting from information.  Google is an evil Capitalist pig that cares nothing for your well being, nor anyone else's but its own.

Doesn't make it a good one, either. Once a company compromises its integrity, standards fall and it knows no boundaries. And I'll bet my lefty that my former brother-in-law's bad experience is only one of many, many more.

So it might be (depending on your point of view)... but at what cost?  At who's expense?  The results on my former brother-in-law (and the way they were portrayed) compromised his integrity.  To many they would have cast a shadow on his character.  Now tell me that's right!

No, it is not!  However, when a company lacks scruples, it becomes capable of doing anything... and when it neglects the privacy of others to derive profit, it becomes evil, pure and simple. Moreover, once it crosses one boundary, nothing is sacred and others soon fall due to the lure of the almighty dollar. 

So, kona, it's not about what Google is good at, it's about what it is bad at.  In Google's case, that is observing privacy, ethics and common decency.  Google puts profit above all else... robbing everybody (Peter) to pay (Paul) itself.

No one is forcing you or anyone else to look at such sites, the problem with sex offenders, terrorists, anti-social(?) people needs to be taken care of in real life and is probably a product of the morals/ethics close to them and the problems in that society, prison sentences dont have anything to do with the internet.

Would you want to have someone screening your phone and say "hey you cant say that!"??
Is it your wish to be living in a global BigBrother house..? and if it is thats very disconcerting. We are allready monitored most of our day as it is.

Whatever man. Go live in your make believe world. I'm done trying to reason with you.

The point isn't what I do or do not want to look at, rather what IS there because moral standards have fallen across the board, giving rise to increased anti-social behaviour across the board.  When the standards of a society fall, so do the standards of the anti-social types.  Crime becomes more frequent, more depraved... and it is encouraged by statements like "keep it open to bad or good".  When societies become so lax/complacent, sufficient deterrents are absent and anti-social behaviour continues unabated because punishments no longer fit the crime.

Anti-social behaviour is thriving now more than ever because the boundaries have been blurred, the rules have become blurred and the consequenses undefined through apathy...by governments caving in to 'convict-prisoner rights' do-gooders.  Like you said, problem/anti-social people are the products of the morals/ethics close to them... in other words, the societies in which they live. If a society accepts/turns a blind eye to bad, then fails to provide adequate consequences/punishments, then that society is going to suffer a high/unabating crime rate.... and one of those societies IS the internet.

That'd be right, I just get going and you call it quits, retreat in to your own make believe world.

Nah, that's orright, mate.   Each it his own, right!  Yeah, it's true that I dislike Google, though probably not that much. but when you came in with support for Google I just couldn't resist a spar so I could exercise some unemployed grey matter.

I think your perception of it is backwards... its real life that influence the "internet" not the other way around.

Why dont you exercise this line of thought about all other things thats on the internet? is kona0197 so special that you dont want to force your morals/ethics onto him/her?

Starkers:

I said I was done but I guess I have more to say.

Your logic is flawed. You dislike Google becuse of something that didn't even happen to you. Not logical.

Yet day after day I and many of us here continue to use Google because it is hands down the best search engine. The reason Yahoo couldn't pull up that info on you ex brother in law is not because Yahoo wasn't willing to play dirty it was because Yahoo isn't as good as Google.

And please don't give me this crap about Google selling me out. MS would do that before Google does.

Disliking something based on an issue that happened to someone else is a bit strange. It didn't happen to you.

So I will continue to live in the real world while you construct walls to keep out Google who you think is evil. I already told you once that MS is just as evil yet I don't see you ditching Windows.