TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Google’s true origin partly lies in gov grants for mass surveillance (2017)

136 点作者 akshaybhalotia将近 5 年前

7 条评论

cousin_it将近 5 年前
So 1) spend many paragraphs describing the sinister idea of &quot;birds of a feather&quot; tracking 2) link to a grant that mentions &quot;query flocks&quot;, which are similar to parameterized SQL queries and unrelated to &quot;birds of a feather&quot; tracking 3) Larry and Sergey got money from that grant as students, though their eventual result was unrelated to that, as often happens 4) conspiracy confirmed.<p>&gt; <i>Brin’s breakthrough research on page ranking by tracking user queries and linking them to the many searches conducted—essentially identifying “birds of a feather”</i><p>What is this talking about? I&#x27;d love to give the author a quick quiz on PageRank. (It&#x27;s about the link structure of websites, not about queries. Google gave amazing results based on that, long before they had high query volume, that&#x27;s how they got successful.)<p>The older I get, the more I realize how damaging Gell-Mann amnesia is. When you read an article making big claims, check the part that intersects with your specialty. If that part is lazy or dishonest, so is the rest of the article.
评论 #23598218 未加载
评论 #23600129 未加载
pwdisswordfish2将近 5 年前
The original story makes little difference. Nor is the quality of the search engine developed of any relevance to the issue raised in this article. The founders originally told us in their 1990&#x27;s paper for TREC (text retrieval conference) that they were making a search engine to help us avoid advertising. Somewhere along the line, they changed their minds. A database of users was born. This is the fundamental issue.<p>The act of compiling an enormous database of individual users through a massive personal data collection effort, storing it permananently for the purpose of providing online ad services, is useful to certain parties who have the capability or legal authority to obtain this data from Google. The data these parties may want can be just a covert intercept (Snowden revelations) or subpoena away. The data has been, whether intentionally or not, collected and stored for their use, when they need it. This is the consequence of what Google does, vacuuming up all this personal data. The data store exists, Google created it at their own (and our) expense, and history shows third parties will get access to it, whether Google or its users like it or not. The data store is a potential liability for users and an asset for Google, plus those third parties.
评论 #23598791 未加载
segfaultbuserr将近 5 年前
While it&#x27;s insightful to reevaluate history in a larger background, such the military-industrial complex, and it&#x27;s also appropriate to criticize these driving forces and its culture, but I&#x27;m not a fan of framing the entire development of computing, the Internet and the web as a giant government conspiracy.<p>There are certainly some secret projects. But the majority comes from groups of academic and industrial researchers working on their own projects, and grants from DARPA, the NSF, the Army or the Navy is how everyone&#x27;s project is supported. Even today, the vast majority of papers on infosec and cryptography are still supported in the same way, and by no means that the researchers are under total control of these agencies. Developers at the Ballistic Research Laboratory (where &#x2F;bin&#x2F;ping was developed) did hacking on 4.3BSD, just like how Berkeley researchers did hacking on 4.3BSD.<p>No conspiracy is needed here, the researchers take advantages of the funding to do their projects, and the government take advantages of these results they funded and put them into military and espionage applications. Feel free the criticize the driving forces and their influences to the projectile of computing R&amp;D, but remember that it&#x27;s a complex interplay between different sectors without clear boundary, rather than a conspiracy planned by a monolithic governmental entity (which is why it&#x27;s called the military-industrial complex, not the military-industrial conspiracy).
jacknews将近 5 年前
&quot;In the mid 1990s, the intelligence community in America began to realize that they had an opportunity. The supercomputing community was just beginning to migrate from university settings into the private sector, led by investments from a place that would come to be known as Silicon Valley.&quot;<p>Sorry, what?<p>Silicon valley was already known as silicon valley in the 60s&#x2F;70s because it made ... silicon.<p>If it had only gained it&#x27;s name in the 90&#x27;s it would have been known as &#x27;Software Valley&#x27; or maybe even &#x27;Grandiose and excited tech salesperson valley&quot;.
dvfjsdhgfv将近 5 年前
I read the whole article so that the rest of you doesn&#x27;t have to. It&#x27;s almost a non-story. The author likes to point out the fact that of the two grants they received, they inlude only one of them in the official Google story. Well, maybe the other one is not significant from the point of view of the company?<p>Yes, the NSA and other agencies benefit from Google&#x27;s activities, and Google doesn&#x27;t hide that. But the title of the article is misleading: the company wasn&#x27;t created with the intention to track people online.
user_agent将近 5 年前
Finally that kind of stuff starts landing on the main page of HN.<p>I highly recommend a unique book: &quot;Surveillance Valley&quot;, Yasha Levine. Although not without cons, the book makes a very strong case for the Internet to be planned from the very start as a surveillance vehicle of the future. The founding grounds of some well-known companies are at lest surprising.<p>The first 50% of the book is about (rather unknown) history of the net industry, 1950-1990, with focus on three letter agencies and their impact on tech. The remaining half is about a broader picture regarding what we&#x27;ve found ourselves in and how the future is going to be like.<p>Surveillance capitalism is just a tip of an iceberg...<p>If you&#x27;re someone who gets that the future by necessity will be both totalitarian and technocratic and you have a high-level technical ability &#x2F; awareness of how one can plan for that, please LEAVE A COMMENT HERE, so I can at least take a look on your profile, read your entries on HN and follow you in the future.<p>It&#x27;s incredibly hard to try to be a cypherpunk today due to a lot of BS people tend to recommend. A lot of awareness once quite common in the past has been forgotten. If you can help in any reasonable way, please do. I still have some time to make myself knowledgeable enough to be able to operate in that new world, but the topic is so huge and I truly think that one day my life is going to depend on that knowledge -- so I&#x27;m stressing too much instead of methodically work on it.<p>(I&#x27;m a web dev, I get some Linux, maybe even more than a little bit, I&#x27;m to some degree knowledgeable about both networking and security, unfortunately more on the level of enterprise products than fundamentals. I know a little bit about everything, which is far from thorough understanding of what&#x27;s going to be really important in the future, and I have a persistent feeling that obscure &#x2F; not well known solutions &#x2F; tools are going to be a cornerstone of making it right).
评论 #23598847 未加载
评论 #23599092 未加载
Melting_Harps将近 5 年前
Who is genuinely surprised? Most all the FAANG are the same with a similar business model, Netflix probably being the most insipid of them all, but is still a huge aggregator of personal information&#x2F;watching habits.
评论 #23598267 未加载