2 
Google’s released its twice-yearly transparency report, and there’s one message within it that rings loud and clear: the US government is spying on us harder than ever.
Seems the search giant is increasingly being asked to hand over user data and remove content by governments and courts from around the world. As Google explains:
[G]overnment demands for user data have increased steadily since we first launched the Transparency Report. In the first half of 2012, there were 20,938 inquiries from government entities around the world. Those requests were for information about 34,614 accounts…
The number of government requests to remove content from our services was largely flat from 2009 to 2011. But it’s spiked in this reporting period. In the first half of 2012, there were 1,791 requests from government officials around the world to remove 17,746 pieces of content
The report goes further, breaking down the figures by country of origin. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the US leads in terms of user data inquiries with 7,969 requests — that’s more than three times as many as India, the next country on the list. The UK? 1,425 requests for 1,732 user accounts, of which Google only responded to 60 per cent.
For its part, Google tends to stand its ground where it can, vetting each and every case. You’ll be pleased to hear that the figures for data handed over and takedowns actually performed are significantly lower than the number of requests. Fine work, Google. You can read the full report here. [Google via TechRadar]
Image by Tischenko Irina/Shutterstock
SCORP: The Future of Throwable Surveillance
The US Government Slaps Google Again But Spares it Microsoft's Fate
How the American Government Hired a Con Artist to Catch Google's Criminal Activities
Oh the irony !
Once again, I don’t see why anyone would have a problem with this.
If you’re not doing anything wrong then you don’t have anything to hide.
My problem is not hiding anything, its the drift towards an Orwellian future. Over a large period of time people don’t notice small changes, a little increase in surveillance here, a few legal changes there, it can all steadily add up to a decrease in liberty and freedom and before anyone knows it we get locked up for thought crime.
Of course it could just be my natural paranoia…
Agreed but look how great our society is currently with all it’s problems through ‘freedom’.
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Ben Franklin
Of course, we have given up our freedom long ago; one can not even walk the streets of London without each step being watched.
Personally, I have nothing to hide and I do have a problem with this.
Seriously why would you quote someone over 200 years dead?
He’d have also called the Internet, planes and god knows what else “Witchcraft!”. Furthermore, as part of the ‘freedom fighters’ that overthrew through armed struggle the legal government of America at the time (that would be us!) he’s not my go to guy simply because history is written by the winners.
Had the Colonial uprising been dealt with in a way that meant the American Revolutionary War (War of Independence) had been won by the British then he would have been hung for treason and history would remember him as a traitor.
This is the fundamental disagreement; you believe the notion of freedom has changed over time, therefore we should not quote a reference to it from someone over 200 years dead as it would be as outdated as witchcraft, whereas I believe it has not. In fact, I would quote someone over 2000 years dead.
I will agree this is a fundamental disagreement because in my opinion the world and human civilisation has altered so much in even the last 200 years (in developed nations at least) that the notion of freedom has changed beyond all recognition.
Don’t forget, slavery was common and legal up to 200 years ago in most Western countries.
The innate problems with your standpoint are
a: the definition of ‘wrong’ is subjective, is premarital or extra marital sex ‘wrong’? Homosexuality? Abortions? Islam? Christianity? Atheism?
b: your statement naively assumes the information is used justly
c: Democratic governments work for their people via mandate and levying control over their people by coercion, bullying or surveillance damages democratic process
d: privacy is an important right, you cannot deny privacy AND have a system where someone is innocent until proven guilty
e: I am sure there were probably Germanic Jews before WW2 that used the argument when the government was investigating people they knew
If I apply for a government job and they do a full background check including emails, wire tapping whatever and find out I am in some way undesirable I would be none the wiser as to why I wasn’t hired… and they could change the face of a nation by hiring like that.
Dealing with your comments:
a) The definition of ‘wrong’ is defined by British Law which does change over time admittedly.
b)My statement assumes the information is used justly the vast majority of the time because humans are involved; replace the humans by computer code and people would have issue with that as well.
c) No coercion or bullying going on and don’t see how surveillance damages the democratic process.
d) Why is privacy an important right? Does the convicted paedophile have a right to privacy or would you be the first to complain you hadn’t been told? Do you know how many times I’ve been convicted for crimes I didn’t commit…..none because on the whole the system does work and the police don’t arrest people leading legal lives, the CPS don’t prosecute them and juries don’t convict them; are there miscarriages of justice sometimes? Of course, because humans are involved; replace the humans by computer code and people would have issue with that as well.
e) Not sure what you’re trying to say here unless you’re also complaining about the National Census.
If you apply for a government job and fail a background check because you’re undesirable then that’s right.
If a civil servant, police officer, member of the security services was inherently racist in their personal life then most people would agree that 99% of the time that this could impact negatively on their professional duties in some way or another.
Obviously we’ll never agree but hopefully you’ll understand there’s 2 sides to almost every story.
Just because there are two sides to a story doesn’t mean each should be held with equal esteem. I, and I’m sure many others are with davis on this one. Your retort to his points are void.
nice sweeping, “I’m right, you’re wrong” statement there, very democratic of you
I think you’d be hard pushed to find anyone who agreed with you that all my retorts are void.
So when does the skynet go live then?