Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
Mossberg said he find his Google results "more and more polluted" despite the algorithm reset (the Panda update at the end of February).
Mossberg said that Bing seems to have more direct answers in some cases.
"There's that in some narrow cases," Schmidt said.
[Danny Sullivan] There you go — one of the top three execs at Google admitting that Bing beats Google, even if it's in a narrow case. I'm sure there have been some statements like that before, but they're few and far between.
[searchengineland.com...][edited by: tedster at 7:03 pm (utc) on Jun 1, 2011]
[edit reason] moved from another location [/edit]
Schmidt says he is very concerned that sum of the economic interests will ultimately lead to balkinization of the Internet. As lack of harmony on various laws unfolds, there could be an Internet per country. He says it is important to have an Internet that is the same everywhere.
Asked about things he [Schmidt] did wrong, he mentioned social. "I screwed up," he says.
Mossberg asks if Google knows too much about us. Schmidt responds that you might prefer to have a private company making those decisions rather the federal government. He says Google will remain a place where you can do anonymous searches. You can continue to do that if you don't log in. He says if you use it as logged user, you can see what we have, and tell us to forget it, he says. Schmidt says they need to keep some information to make algorithms better; he says they are defaulting to keep data for 12-18 months. He says privacy is a trade-off between public safety and right to privacy.
[edited by: tedster at 7:04 pm (utc) on Jun 1, 2011]
Schmidt says he is very concerned that sum of the economic interests will ultimately lead to balkinization of the Internet. As lack of harmony on various laws unfolds, there could be an Internet per country. He says it is important to have an Internet that is the same everywhere.
Google will remain a place where you can do anonymous searches, where we don't know anything about you. And we're very committed to having you have control over the information we have about you. From our perspective, the ultimate answer is transparency - we tell people what we know and we give them the choice of getting it deleted.
Google will remain a place where you can do anonymous searches, where we don't know anything about you. And we're very committed to having you have control over the information we have about you. From our perspective, the ultimate answer is transparency - we tell people what we know and we give them the choice of getting it deleted.
As lack of harmony on various laws unfolds, there could be an Internet per country. He says it is important to have an Internet that is the same everywhere.
Google will remain a place where you can do anonymous searches
Google Inc. has agreed to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it used deceptive tactics and violated its own privacy promises to consumers when it launched its social network, Google Buzz, in 2010. The agency alleges the practices violate the FTC Act. The proposed settlement bars the company from future privacy misrepresentations, requires it to implement a comprehensive privacy program, and calls for regular, independent privacy audits for the next 20 years. This is the first time an FTC settlement order has required a company to implement a comprehensive privacy program to protect the privacy of consumers’ information. In addition, this is the first time the FTC has alleged violations of the substantive privacy requirements of the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Framework, which provides a method for U.S. companies to transfer personal data lawfully from the European Union to the United States.
“When companies make privacy pledges, they need to honor them,” said Jon Leibowitz, Chairman of the FTC. “This is a tough settlement that ensures that Google will honor its commitments to consumers and build strong privacy protections into all of its operations."+
.......
When the Commission issues a consent order on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of up to $16,000.