DISQUS

DISQUS Hello! The Technology Liberation Front is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.

Community Page

The Technology Liberation Front

The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.
Jump to original thread »
Author

The Technology Liberation Front » Archive » Cuil’s Incredible Privacy Policy

Started by TLF · 11 months ago

No excerpt available. Jump to website »

5 comments

  • Dan Lockton

    11 months ago

    Is this because of ethics, or a structural decision to limit their possible potential liability and the hassle involved? Either way, it's interesting.
    reply
  • Ryan Radia

    11 months ago

    Well, maybe they should start logging IP addresses--doing so has worked out pretty nicely for Google, and considering how terrible Cuil's search results are, they need all the help they can get.
    reply
  • Jim Harper

    11 months ago

    How would logging IP addresses improve their search results? Google policy people here in D.C. - true, they may not be the most knowledgeable about the guts of Google's search and advertising algorithms - say that there's nothing better than a person's current search for determining ad relevance. "Psychographic profiling" - or whatever you might want to call it - isn't that important.
    reply
  • Ryan Radia

    11 months ago

    I don't really know if IP addresses are all that useful. But Google maintains records of IP addresses and search queries for 18 months, even though the practice is getting more and more controversial. You have to assume there's at least some pretty good reasoning behind for Google's data retention policy.
    Not that I'm for IP logging, though, even if it means better search results. Consumers demand privacy and the market is providing it, which is exactly what we should expect from competitive discipline.
    reply
  • Jim Harper

    11 months ago

    I agree that this is a good example of the market providing privacy (or at least seeking to) consistent with consumer demand (which, of course, is distinct from consumer-advocate demand).

    As a consumer myself, I don't assume that there's a good reason for Google's data retention policy. Most IT systems collect information by default, without regard to need and without balancing privacy considerations, so I assume that Google fell into the habit of long data-retention terms and that they may not have a fully justifiable reason for doing so, all things considered.

    Trying to dictate data retention terms from the outside (i.e. through regulation) would be a fool's errand, and handing that authority to governments would lead to longer data retention terms and less privacy as the interests of law enforcement (more trumped up than genuine) would prevail.
    reply

Add New Comment

Returning? Login