<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: If Google went bad&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://talkingtiger.org/2007/04/24/if-google-went-bad/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://talkingtiger.org/2007/04/24/if-google-went-bad/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2009 23:18:06 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tiger</title>
		<link>http://talkingtiger.org/2007/04/24/if-google-went-bad/#comment-44</link>
		<dc:creator>Tiger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2007 10:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://talkingtiger.org/?p=58#comment-44</guid>
		<description>Does Google know too much about you (another article that arrived in my inbox)&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;http://www.smh.com.au/news/security/does-google-know-too-much-about-you/2007/06/18/1182018977067.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does Google know too much about you (another article that arrived in my inbox)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.smh.com.au/news/security/does-google-know-too-much-about-you/2007/06/18/1182018977067.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.smh.com.au/news/security/does-google-know-too-much-about-you/2007/06/18/1182018977067.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tiger</title>
		<link>http://talkingtiger.org/2007/04/24/if-google-went-bad/#comment-41</link>
		<dc:creator>Tiger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2007 02:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://talkingtiger.org/?p=58#comment-41</guid>
		<description>According to Privacy International, Google&#039;s privacy practices are the worst among the internet&#039;s top destinataions - http://www.smh.com.au/news/web/googles-the-worst-says-privacy-group/2007/06/11/1181414177563.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>According to Privacy International, Google&#8217;s privacy practices are the worst among the internet&#8217;s top destinataions &#8211; <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/news/web/googles-the-worst-says-privacy-group/2007/06/11/1181414177563.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.smh.com.au/news/web/googles-the-worst-says-privacy-group/2007/06/11/1181414177563.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: &#38;rew</title>
		<link>http://talkingtiger.org/2007/04/24/if-google-went-bad/#comment-38</link>
		<dc:creator>&#38;rew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jun 2007 11:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://talkingtiger.org/?p=58#comment-38</guid>
		<description>Well I think it could be an issues, as I think there is a bit of a difference between driving by someone in your car and taking random photos of people and putting them up on a very popular site with the location of where the photos were taken...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well I think it could be an issues, as I think there is a bit of a difference between driving by someone in your car and taking random photos of people and putting them up on a very popular site with the location of where the photos were taken&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tiger</title>
		<link>http://talkingtiger.org/2007/04/24/if-google-went-bad/#comment-37</link>
		<dc:creator>Tiger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jun 2007 10:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://talkingtiger.org/?p=58#comment-37</guid>
		<description>I noticed that too, and it adds another interesting dimension to the mix. &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Google is claiming privacy isn&#039;t an issue because anyone is able to take the photos they are taking, and post them on a web-site. &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Does this mean that it isn&#039;t an issue?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I noticed that too, and it adds another interesting dimension to the mix. </p>
<p>Google is claiming privacy isn&#8217;t an issue because anyone is able to take the photos they are taking, and post them on a web-site. </p>
<p>Does this mean that it isn&#8217;t an issue?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: &#38;rew</title>
		<link>http://talkingtiger.org/2007/04/24/if-google-went-bad/#comment-36</link>
		<dc:creator>&#38;rew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jun 2007 01:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://talkingtiger.org/?p=58#comment-36</guid>
		<description>Google&#039;s new street view photos may cause a bit of &lt;a HREF=&quot;http://www.smh.com.au/news/web/smile-youre-on-googles-candid-camera/2007/06/04/1180809390551.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2&quot; REL=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;a problem&lt;/a&gt; for privacy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google&#8217;s new street view photos may cause a bit of <a HREF="http://www.smh.com.au/news/web/smile-youre-on-googles-candid-camera/2007/06/04/1180809390551.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2" REL="nofollow">a problem</a> for privacy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Verne</title>
		<link>http://talkingtiger.org/2007/04/24/if-google-went-bad/#comment-33</link>
		<dc:creator>Verne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2007 02:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://talkingtiger.org/?p=58#comment-33</guid>
		<description>Having unrestricted access to users&#039; personal data would be appealing to some advertisers wth loose ethics, but there is absolutely zero long term benefit for Google in misusing or exploiting any data it might have.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;Google&#039;s advertising appeal is so reliant on its legion of loyal users - it has to protect that relationship with as much energy as it would with the businesses that use its ad products.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Having unrestricted access to users&#8217; personal data would be appealing to some advertisers wth loose ethics, but there is absolutely zero long term benefit for Google in misusing or exploiting any data it might have.</p>
<p>Google&#8217;s advertising appeal is so reliant on its legion of loyal users &#8211; it has to protect that relationship with as much energy as it would with the businesses that use its ad products.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tiger</title>
		<link>http://talkingtiger.org/2007/04/24/if-google-went-bad/#comment-32</link>
		<dc:creator>Tiger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2007 10:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://talkingtiger.org/?p=58#comment-32</guid>
		<description>I just came across this interesting blog post - &#039;Should Google be reined in?&#039; &lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;http://blogs.smh.com.au/mashup/archives//012934.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just came across this interesting blog post &#8211; &#8216;Should Google be reined in?&#8217; </p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.smh.com.au/mashup/archives//012934.html" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.smh.com.au/mashup/archives//012934.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: &#38;</title>
		<link>http://talkingtiger.org/2007/04/24/if-google-went-bad/#comment-31</link>
		<dc:creator>&#38;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://talkingtiger.org/?p=58#comment-31</guid>
		<description>Google did &lt;a HREF=&quot;http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/03/taking-steps-to-further-improve-our.html&quot; REL=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;announce that would increase the privacy of their users&lt;/a&gt;. At least after 18-24 months they will adjust their logs so it will not be traceable to you. I am not sure if this just applies to searchs or their other applications as well.&lt;br/&gt;&lt;br/&gt;To see what they log of you when perform a search &lt;a HREF=&quot;http://www.google.com/privacy_faq.html&quot; REL=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;see here&lt;/a&gt;. I&#039;m not sure if this is different if you have a google account, and i am not sure what information gets shared between their applications...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google did <a HREF="http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/03/taking-steps-to-further-improve-our.html" REL="nofollow">announce that would increase the privacy of their users</a>. At least after 18-24 months they will adjust their logs so it will not be traceable to you. I am not sure if this just applies to searchs or their other applications as well.</p>
<p>To see what they log of you when perform a search <a HREF="http://www.google.com/privacy_faq.html" REL="nofollow">see here</a>. I&#8217;m not sure if this is different if you have a google account, and i am not sure what information gets shared between their applications&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
