 Name Game
Premium Member
join:2002-07-07
Grand Rapids, MI |
Is it possible to quit Google?By Kate Dailey Google's reach spreads far across the web. But is it possible to go online without being noticed by the search giant? Three computer professionals try to part ways with Google. Tom Henderson spends what he describes as "way too much" time online. The managing director for Extreme Labs, a technology company in Bloomington, Indiana, Henderson says he's often up late in the evening doing work for clients - and having fun exploring the far reaches of the internet. But when Google announced earlier this year that it would be streamlining the privacy agreements for all of its products - including YouTube, Blogger and Gmail - Henderson decided to find a way to stay online without patronising Google. The policy was criticised by EU officials for being too invasive. "At that point I had to make a decision," says Henderson. "Do I like the terms of service and am I willing to abide by it to use Google's products? And the answer in both cases was no." So Henderson decided to quit Google for good. He wrote a manifesto for IT World called How I Divorced Google and set about initiating the break-up. Four months later, he's still living a mostly Google-free existence. » www.bbc.co.uk/news/magaz ··· 18777671"We don't sell our users' personal information. It's simply not how we operate” Google spokewoman |
|
 rcdaileyDragoonfly
Premium Member
join:2005-03-29
Rialto, CA
1 recommendation |
rcdailey
Premium Member
2012-Jul-10 7:27 am
Saying that you are living a "mostly Google-free existence" is a little like saying you are mostly a virgin. |
|
 SundogI'm an analog man in a digital world
Premium Member
join:2003-12-12
Tucson, AZ |
to Name Game
Been wondering the same thing. Especially since I bought an Android phone. lol |
|
HarryH3
Premium Member
join:2005-02-21 |
to Name Game
Even this very page has links to googleapis.com and google-analytics.com. The pages here don't display properly without letting the scripts from googleapis.com run. :-( |
|
Name Game
Premium Member
join:2002-07-07
Grand Rapids, MI |
Source: Google to pay $22.5M fine in privacy case SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Google is poised to pay a $22.5 million fine to resolve allegations that it broke a privacy promise by secretly tracking millions of Web surfers who rely on Apple's Safari browser, according to a person familiar with settlement. The person who spoke to The Associated Press Tuesday asked not to be identified because the fine has yet to be approved by the Federal Trade Commission, which oversees online privacy issues in the U.S. If approved by the FTC's five commissioners, the $22.5 million penalty would be the largest the agency has ever imposed on a single company. Even so, the fine won't cause Google Inc. much financial pain. With $49 billion in the bank, the Internet's search and advertising leader is expected to generate revenue this year of about $46 billion, which means the company should bring in enough money to cover the fine in slightly more than four hours. » www.businessweek.com/ap/ ··· acy-caseSo how about some money for the people they tracked ? That why I think all this stuff is stupid.  |
|
OZO
Premium Member
join:2003-01-17 |
OZO to HarryH3
Premium Member
2012-Jul-10 10:56 pm
to HarryH3
said by HarryH3:Even this very page has links to googleapis.com and google-analytics.com. The pages here don't display properly without letting the scripts from googleapis.com run. :-(
Here is what I have in my hosts file: # Google tracking sites:
127.0.0.1 google-analytics.com
127.0.0.1 www.google-analytics.com
127.0.0.1 ssl.google-analytics.com
127.0.0.1 googleanalytics.com
127.0.0.1 www.googleanalytics.com
127.0.0.1 ssl.googleanalytics.com
127.0.0.1 adservices.google.com
127.0.0.1 pagead.googlesyndication.com
127.0.0.1 pagead2.googlesyndication.com
127.0.0.1 fusion.google.com
127.0.0.1 www.googleadservices.com
127.0.0.1 partner.googleadservices.com
127.0.0.1 doubleclick.com
127.0.0.1 doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 pubads.g.doubleclick.net
127.0.0.1 urchin.com
127.0.0.1 service.urchin.com
# Tracking:
127.0.0.1 fastclick.net
127.0.0.1 hitbox.com
127.0.0.1 omniture.com
127.0.0.1 clients4.google.com # chromium TLSv1.1 (443) connection
# Tracking in BBR site:
127.0.0.1 ajax.googleapis.com
Additionally I run Proxomitron filter (with latest sidki's filters) that removes all tracking code from any web sites I visit... I don't see any problems working with this forum site completely Google free (or at least I don't know about any one). |
|
| |
to Name Game
Google has become so big because the public has allowed it to do so. The public just continues feeding the fish.......by doing nearly nothing to prevent being tracked........after many years of preaching how to help them selfs its obvious by the growth of google that either no one was listening or that no one really cares.
|
|
 NetFixerFrom My Cold Dead Hands
Premium Member
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Pace 5268AC
TRENDnet TEW-829DRU
|
to HarryH3
said by HarryH3:Even this very page has links to googleapis.com and google-analytics.com. The pages here don't display properly without letting the scripts from googleapis.com run. :-(
Well, I suppose that with some browser and OS combinations that might be true, but I have never run across a single page or function on this web site that actually required googleapis.com: 
Since I keep seeing posters saying that it is required for this site, I haven't yet bothered to block it in my perimeter router/firewall (as I have done with most of the other Google crap sites), but so far I can't recall ever having to actually use it.
|
|
 JuggernautIrreverent or irrelevant?
Premium Member
join:2006-09-05
Kelowna, BC |
I have both set to 'Untrusted'. No issues at all. |
|
NetFixerFrom My Cold Dead Hands
Premium Member
join:2004-06-24
The Boro Netgear CM500
Pace 5268AC
TRENDnet TEW-829DRU
|
NetFixer
Premium Member
2012-Jul-11 3:00 am
said by Juggernaut:I have both set to 'Untrusted'. No issues at all.
I have been told that some of the functions that site moderator's use for editing, moving, deleting unwanted posts require googleapis, but I don't think that there are any user functions that really require it. Perhaps eventually someone with intimate knowledge of this site's unseen functionality might pop into this thread with information either confirming or contradicting that? It is certainly possible that I am actually missing out on some super fancy functions on this site, but I just don't know about it with googleapis blocked. |
|
| |
said by NetFixer:Perhaps eventually someone with intimate knowledge of this site's unseen functionality might pop into this thread with information either confirming or contradicting that?
If I disallow googleapis as illustrated above, it does inhibit mod abilities on the site. |
|
|
 AVDRespice, Adspice, Prospice
Premium Member
join:2003-02-06
Onion, NJ |
AVD
Premium Member
2012-Jul-11 9:03 am
you wont see any vote results without google apis either.
Plus the reply key didn't work, but I don't remember if that was a google thing or some other script issue. |
|
 jabarnutLight Years Away
Premium Member
join:2005-01-22
Galaxy M31
1 recommendation |
to Name Game
Living a "Google-free existence" seems a very interesting topic. In fact, I'm in the process of doing a Google search right now to learn a bit more about it. (Already found a couple of YouTube videos, and other articles on the subject).  |
|
 angussf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-11
Tucson, AZ |
to HarryH3
said by HarryH3:Even this very page has links to googleapis.com and google-analytics.com. The pages here don't display properly without letting the scripts from googleapis.com run. :-(
I'm using NoScript on Firefox. google-analytics is in my untrusted list, and googleapis.com doesn't appear in the NoScript list of domains asking to run scripts here. AFAICT the page displays properly. |
|
 Oregonian
Premium Member
join:2000-12-21
West Linn, OR |
to jabarnut
said by jabarnut:Living a "Google-free existence" seems a very interesting topic.
In fact, I'm in the process of doing a Google search right now to learn a bit more about it. (Already found a couple of YouTube videos, and other articles on the subject).
I see what you did there. |
|
NetFixerFrom My Cold Dead Hands
Premium Member
join:2004-06-24
The Boro Netgear CM500
Pace 5268AC
TRENDnet TEW-829DRU
|
to AVD
said by AVD:you wont see any vote results without google apis either.
Plus the reply key didn't work, but I don't remember if that was a google thing or some other script issue.
I seem to remember that I have no problems replying, quoting, posting, or editing with googleapis disabled (this reply for example was made with googleapis disabled). And while I seldom bother looking at poll posts, I can't recall ever having a problem seeing the results of the few I have viewed with googleapis disabled. [disclaimer]YMMV[/disclaimer] |
|
NetFixer
1 recommendation |
to KeysCapt
said by KeysCapt:If I disallow googleapis as illustrated above, it does inhibit mod abilities on the site.
Thanks. Sounds like another reason (aside from the obvious reasons) to not want a moderator job on this site.  |
|
3 recommendations |
said by NetFixer:Thanks. Sounds like another reason (aside from the obvious reasons) to not want a moderator job on this site.
One of many. |
|
OZO
Premium Member
join:2003-01-17 |
to NetFixer
said by NetFixer:said by AVD:you wont see any vote results without google apis either.
Plus the reply key didn't work, but I don't remember if that was a google thing or some other script issue.
I seem to remember that I have no problems replying, quoting, posting, or editing with googleapis disabled (this reply for example was made with googleapis disabled). And while I seldom bother looking at poll posts, I can't recall ever having a problem seeing the results of the few I have viewed with googleapis disabled. [disclaimer]YMMV[/disclaimer] I can confirm that. There is no problem with replying, quoting, posting, or editing. And there is no any problem with participating in polls or viewing results. As I mentioned earlier, in my environment Google tracking is permanently blocked. |
|
| |
to Name Game
I've been using this search engine: » startpage.com/do/metasearch.pl"Enhanced by Google" "Startpage offers you Web search results from Google in complete privacy! When you search with Startpage, we remove all identifying information from your query and submit it anonymously to Google ourselves. We get the results and return them to you in total privacy". So they say. |
|
Oregonian
Premium Member
join:2000-12-21
West Linn, OR |
to Name Game
|
|
| |
Adrik Ivanov to Frodo
Anon
2012-Jul-11 9:12 pm
to Frodo
said by Frodo:I've been using this search engine:
»startpage.com/do/metasearch.pl
"Enhanced by Google"
"Startpage offers you Web search results from Google in complete privacy!
When you search with Startpage, we remove all identifying information from your query and submit it anonymously to Google ourselves. We get the results and return them to you in total privacy".
So they say.
Startpage is good, but isn't anyone curious as to why Google allows them to scrap their servers when they generate revenue based on knowing what people are searching? I'm not sure I fully trust them. The HTTPS version of Duckduckgo on the other hand, appears trustworthy. Each time anyone discovers a 'potential' flaw in DDG the owner makes adjustments to fix the potential loopholes. For example Amazon-Cloud hosts his search indexers, and one person discovered that in theory - Amazon could scrap the searches. So Gabriel at DDG developed a system that uses proxy servers in the basement of his home to redirect your searches through the indexer. Gab is extremely privacy aware.. » www.gabrielweinberg.com/ ··· ous.htmlI have now solved this problem by setting up a reverse proxy between me and S3. This costs me more bandwidth and server resources, but it is worth it to solve the privacy problem for you. Additionally, it actually improves usability because a) I set up a cache on my end and b) I can now turn off https to S3. Furthermore, it is even more private than simply dropping the Referer string. Since you are no longer making the request on your side, your IP address isn't being sent to them at all. I can also explicitly set the Referer string (using the nginx more headers module), which I set to 'http://duckduckgo.com/'; I haven't used Google in quite some time, and if I do I ensure I am on an overseas proxy before I do. There are a few major contenders for videos that are up and coming that will challenge Youtube. Unfortunately one of the big players was MegaUpload, they had an amazing video service but the feds didn't like them challenging the cartel corporations. I would never, ever, install or log into anything google, ever. Chrome is privacy suspicious, Iron is much better in this regard, but I think Opera is probably the safest to use. |
|
| |
Frodo
Member
2012-Jul-11 10:40 pm
said by Adrik Ivanov :Startpage is good, but isn't anyone curious as to why Google allows them to scrap their servers when they generate revenue based on knowing what people are searching? I'm not sure I fully trust them. They're quick. The other sister site is » ixquick.com/No mention of Google on that site. I've tried Duckduckgo but the results didn't seem "google" like. Haven't tried them lately. |
|
Mele20
Premium Member
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI |
to Frodo
If you use Fx, then use Google Sharing extension. It is much better than Startpage. » www.googlesharing.net/ |
|
| Mele20 |
to Adrik Ivanov
Duckduckgo has terrible search results. Plus, that is Amazon. I hate Amazon as much, if not more, than Google.
The best current solution (since the demise of Scroogle) is Google Sharing extension for Fx. |
|
| |
Adrik Ivanov
Anon
2012-Jul-12 11:38 am
said by Mele20:Duckduckgo has terrible search results. Plus, that is Amazon. I hate Amazon as much, if not more, than Google.
The best current solution (since the demise of Scroogle) is Google Sharing extension for Fx.
Actually DDG has the most relevant search results. Why? They only robot actual links to other links, rather than all web content. This means the searches are always going to result in valid working links, that lead somewhere important. Google spiders trawl the entire internet, offering really stupid results. Also Google tampers with results to convey their desired end-result - untrustworthy. Do you even read? I already posted how doing DDG searches doesn't even expose you to Amazon because DDG uses a reverse proxy to protect user searches. Have you checked the privacy policy on that search proxy you are recommending? Might want to.. Not to m ention Firefox is crap anyone. DDG has one of the best privacy policies in the industry. DDG has no affiliation whatsoever with Amazon, they merely contact some of their server architecture, then install additional privacy protection over that. Why? DDG used to run on servers in Gabriels basement, but it has become so popular he needed to leverage much much more server power to maintain speed and accuracy. The indexers I believe are still housed in his basement, along with the reverse proxy that protects users IP from being sniffed. Once again - read the links: » www.gabrielweinberg.com/ ··· ous.html |
|
Mele20
Premium Member
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI |
Mele20
Premium Member
2012-Jul-12 11:19 pm
I don't need to be spoon-fed. I like to make my own decisions about what web sites are "important". Why would I do a search in the first place if I did not want ALL WEB CONTENT for my search terms returned? Duckduckgo is trying to control MY search. I don't want that! The same thing happens with Startpage and don't like it either.
Yes, I have read the privacy policy for Abine. Yeah, I have to trust that they are telling the truth. Just as I would have to trust that what you say about Duckduckgo search is the truth and just as I had to trust Scroogle was telling the truth. If I liked puny search results like I get with Duckduckgo then I might decide to trust its privacy policy but I think Duckduckgo has horrible search results so I don't need to decide whether or not to trust its privacy policy. Same with Startpage...crappy search results and Startpage uses an SSL provider that I have as untrusted in my browsers and it makes for lots of difficulty (except on Opera) when trying to make a trust exception for Startpage SSL cert.
I use the Proxomitron with Sidki's 12/2011 configs. It protects me with Google and Google Sharing extension simply provides another layer of protection. I hope to see Google Sharing extended to Sea Monkey and Opera in the near future as I have seen Ghostery get extended to them. |
|
| |
to Adrik Ivanov
said by Adrik Ivanov :Chrome is privacy suspicious, Iron is much better in this regard, but I think Opera is probably the safest to use.
There is no difference in Iron and Chromium. I saw an article where a guy got the Iron source code and diff'ed it against the Chromium codebase. He found that the only difference is they deleted a few lines of code related to the RLZ tracking and a couple of other things that can be easily turned off in Chrome. In any case, Chromium (the development version of Chrome) has none of these tracking features by default. (No RLZ, no usage statistics, and no auto-updates). Even in regular Chrome, all of them can be turned off. So you might as well use Chromium and not a project ran by amateurs such as Iron. EDIT: I would also like to add that those of you looking for a privacy enhanced search engine (with better results than DDG), take a look at privatelee. » privatelee.qrobe.it |
|
OZO
Premium Member
join:2003-01-17 |
OZO
Premium Member
2012-Jul-13 12:36 am
said by KodiacZiller:There is no difference in Iron and Chromium.
...
In any case, Chromium (the development version of Chrome) has none of these tracking features by default.
Do you actually run it (Iron and/or Chromium) or you are just guessing about all of that? I'm asking because I do (in fact, I type this post in the latest developer's version right now - v22.0.1203.0) and I know for sure, that Chromium always try to snoop my browsing via permanently set secure connection (TLSv1.1 - 443)) to clients4.google.com. I don't see that happen with Iron... Do you know how to turn it off in Chromium's settings without putting that host in hosts file (as I do)? |
|
Mele20
Premium Member
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI |
to KodiacZiller
You are wrong. With Chrome you get Flash updates force fed and you cannot have Chrome without Flash nor can you allow Flash but control updates for it. You also get ALL UPDATES OF ANY SORT for Chrome FORCE FED to you. You have NO choices if you use Chrome. With Iron, YOU the user decide IF and WHEN you wish to update Iron.
Chrome is FULL of privacy invasion crap that is NOT in Iron. As for Flash, you want it for Iron you, the user, have to download Flash and you, the user, decides when it will be updated, etc.
With Chrome you have married Google and you always are naked in a glass house. That is not true for any other browser including Iron. |
|
