Google Privacy: An Oxymoron?

Google has a "privacy center" to tell you how private and secure Google can be. By reading more about this, I found out more shocking violations of my privacy then I had previously fully grasped. For example, I knew Google had the technology to transcribe and save your Google Talk calls, but I didn't know that it was automatic and quite some effort to stop. I also knew that Google looks at and saves my search history, but I didn't know how specifically to me they store that information. Apparently, they use previous search terms to "help find what you are looking for."

They keep track and try to personalize almost everything I am doing! It is insane to me. What do you think is next? The following video is the promotional video Google gives for their security settings:

Transparency: Clear as Mud

As much as we advocate for transparency, the American population seems to not to pay much attention when it is provided. In 2002, President Bush signed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act giving the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) more power and establish rules to make financial statements more transparent.

The Act increased transparency by  requiring 
   "...  "Real-time" disclosure.
   ...   The reconciliation of pro forma reporting with Generally Accepted Accounting Practices (GAAP).
   ...   Full financial disclosure of all off-balance sheet and related parties transactions.
   ...   Expanded disclosure in connection with internal controls -- financial as well as non-financial"
(http://www.businessforum.com/SEC01.html)


Now, financial statements have about 50 pages of disclosures for investors to read through and get a "transparent" look at the company. Still, those statements are hardly even glanced at, because investors are too distracted by the bottom-line, otherwise known as net income. 


To me, that sums up most of the transparency issue with the general public. Everyone wants transparency, but once they have it, they don't care to look inside. One thought might be to consolidate that information and make it easier to navigate. The problem with this arises when the information is condensed too much, bias gets added or there is no context and so people are misled. 


It leaves us in a Catch-22. Everyone wants more information, but when they get it they don't want to read it. The real question I have boils down to does America really believe in transparency, or do they believe in the idea of transparency?

Social Reporting

My brother was promoted, my friend got engaged, another friend got married. How did I find out about these things? I read it on Facebook and thousands of other details about my friends' lives too. People will express general posts, "Im one week and Im craving chocolate mints!!!" to specific details about their lives or the lives of other, "Long day at the ER on Saturday. August was hurt pretty bad while swimming." Is this the point of social media?


I volunteer and mentor at the US Dream Academy and there I have learned about one of the new fun things for kids to play--Weeworld. This is basically a site for kids to play games and chat with other kids, or so it was intended for. However, grown ups are able to get on as well and disguise who they are by creating a young avatar and pretending to be younger. This can put kids in danger of telling an adult particular details about their lives that put themselves in danger. 


So would an age limit help to alleviate the problem? Many sites have put an age limit on obtaining an account, but if a child's friends get around that with a fake email then why shouldn't they? Is it the parents responsibility to watch how the child is participating in these forums? Is it time to give people an internet ID like a Social Security Number? Would that cause more problems than it would resolve? Where do we go from here?