Google is Evil
I now think Google is evil, and I’m getting rid of most of my use of their services. Read why on Macworld.
A few links:
How to Rob Someone Using Google Buzz
Government Grants Google Power to Sell Power Like A Utility
Does Google like Wikipedia too much?
Here’s another perspective on the Google Question (naturally it’s on YouTube, owned by Google):
Posted: 2/19/2010 by kirk | Filed under: Miscellanea | 15 Comments »
, 
, or 
.
thanks – I’ve been looking for the buzzkill link on the gmail page.
a mac user “dropping google” for being “evil” is like a known heroin addict who trumpets his decision to quit smoking.
Agreed. I killed my Gmail account when this Buzz thing came along.
Good for you Kirk. I ditched Google long ago. With Ixquick I’ll find anything I want and it’s got an excellent privacy policy.
I do keep my Gmail account for junk and it’s handy when changing ISP’s to have webmail.
https://ixquick.com/eng/privacy-policy.html
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/03/search-privacy
Cheers,
SK.
I came to your site to recommend ixquick, but Stephan beat me to it. I also started using it after ditching google, and I like it. So I’ll second Stephan’s suggestion.
So let me get this straight. Because Google donated $2 Million to one of the biggest and best website in the world, a website that gives a wealth of information to anyone and everyone with internet access, for free… they are evil. Google’s ACTUAL motto is to “Organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.” And guess what, that include’s a website that is by far the world’s largest and most accurate encyclopedia.
And I like how you are protesting by dropping “some” of their services. Wow, how courageous. Do you also claim to be a Christian by going to church once a year?
And because of a weird loophole that could possibly lead to somebody actually being burglarized, that’s like saying window companies are evil because I can look out them and clearly see my neighbors leaving on vacation. Or maybe the US Mail is evil for letting mail pile up on my front doorstep when I’m away on a work trip?
How about just admitting you’re paranoid and love to buy into short-sided hype?
Well, let’s see…
Re Wikipedia, I question their motives.
Christian? Nope, not me.
Burglarized? Loophole? No, it’s more than a loophole, it’s the way they grab your location. I didn’t write that article.
Short-sided? Google that word and find how to spell it…
Good on you, Kirk. I have been de-Googling my life over February as well. I am glad to know I was not alone in removing these services from my account.
I think some of your critics are missing the point: we are opting out of things that Google does poorly. It has strayed from its values, it has way too many MBAs making decisions rather than users and techs, and it has, arguably, pretty lousy customer service for a $40 billion company. Yes, it does some things well and it should be commended for that. But don’t expect me to give up any more private data than is necessary for that commendation, or provide more eyeballs for Google’s ads. We’re minimizing our contact with the company. It’s like slowly distancing the annoying co-worker who started off nice, but turned out to be a jerk.
You are also being realistic. I noted someone said that you should quit Facebook if you were concerned about privacy. My, what childish reactions we have out there. I am concerned, too, about Facebook, but right now I tolerate the situation because the benefits outweigh the detriments. It’s good for some of the things I do, just as Google News suits me, too.
When the scales tip and the detriments become too much, it’s bye-bye to Google (and, one day, Facebook).
My own series of problems with Google began with a six-month fight to get a friend’s blog restored. Techdirt wrote this up in December:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20091228/1803277526.shtml
It links to the “support” thread, which it calls ‘frustrating’. We prevailed at the end, thanks to Blogger product manager Rick Klau. Since then, I have been removing my own blogs from Blogger, because I plain don’t trust them.
Kirk, please don’t think I am spamming your comments, but you might find some of my own thoughts as they unfolded of interest.
http://jackyan.com/blog/2010/02/google-might-have-signed-you-up-to-stuff-you-never-asked-for/
Getting surprised at what I had allegedly signed up for on my Google account page. You might want to check yours, as well as your Google Dashboard. I have Google Talk in there, and I’ve neither used it nor downloaded it.
http://jackyan.com/blog/2010/02/more-google-privacy-breaches-in-reader/
I never subscribed (knowingly) to Reader, and was signed on to it (complete with a follower) through following blogs. So, if I have removed every blog, the follower, and turned off Web History (twice—once at launch, and once after Google switched it on for me again without asking), how can Reader still give me recommendations for blogs?
http://jackyan.com/blog/2010/02/i-dont-have-gmail-so-how-did-i-get-a-buzz-account-again/
Discovering that being Gmail-free does not mean you are Buzz-free, and how deleting a profile does not mean that Buzz disappears from your Google Dashboard. (And discovering that clicking on the privacy policy link from the Google Buzz page nets you a 404.)
We are definitely not alone in thinking this way, and if there is a Google-bashing bandwagon, we are not the ones who set it rolling. Google itself did, including its own CEO. Some might accuse us of reading too much into the failures behind Buzz et al, and that is, really, the core of any disagreement.
Can someone explain to me how Google donating $2 million to the Wikimedia Foundation is a bad thing?
Aaron, in principle, donating to something that is about free information is not a bad thing, but some have raised a question whether this biases Google toward featuring Wikipedia. For instance, Google News features Wikipedia, even though Wikipedia itself says it forbids original research and everything must be second-hand from other media sources. The question then becomes: why link it, if it is second-hand and, in that respect, no more accurate than a blog that re-reports?
I think those who think ill of the donation assume in part (whether rightly or wrongly) that this does not give other netizens with equally valuable information a fair go. Some of the other concerns are at the article Kirk linked.
So you are saying that Google features Wikipedia and in return the Wikimedia Foundation receives a $2 million donation from Google. Am I missing something? Isn’t that backwards? Sounds like Google got ripped off.
No, I didn’t say that. I have no idea what Google’s motives were for the donation.
I think what the (linked) article is trying to suggest is that Google is seeing to it (by donating $2 Mil) that Wikipedia doesn’t go under, and that way they can keep putting Wikipedia links high in their results. And since a lot of people (apparently) get to Wikipedia pages through Google, then Google gets all that ad revenue.
But really it’s no different then Google showing any and all webpages in their results. Every time somebody does a Google search they make money on ads. That’s how it works. It’s no different then blaming them for making money off a search for “cats.” They provide free services by showing relevant, non-flash “hit the monkey” banner ads. Which is more than what most any other website can say. It’s just that people use Google search (and products) a LOT, so they make a shit ton of money off the ads. Which, in turn, makes it possible to provide even more (and better) free products. Some people think that’s evil I guess.
Kirk, or anyone else in the same boat as Kirk… Have you ever considered using Google Apps (full paid version)? Not only do you get “real” customer support, but you get more space, more options and no ads in your email.
Re Google Apps: I have no need to have the documents I work on in some “cloud”, so I simply don’t use Google Docs, with the exception of a couple of shared docs I only need to view for some of my clients (they maintain the docs). So I have never considered a different approach to using them.
On Google apps: me, neither, for precisely the same reason as Kirk. On Google Docs, when friends send me anything, I read, download and delete.