Google, Cookies and Privacy

The privacy debate that continues on ad infinitum is certainly an interesting and timely one. In fact, I believe that the problem of privacy invasion will become one of the major mainstream discussion points of the early 21th century as more and more people educate themselves on some of the practices that websites use.

As to where I fall on the subject, more often than not, I side with the people here. I'm a believer that people should be able to what they chose, within the confines of the law, in private. It should not necessarily be public knowledge that your 45 year-old neighbor spends his evenings in a pink dress while watching Teletubbies, nor if your 15 year-old neighbor spends her time watching explicit videos. I disagree with large sections of the Patriot Act. I'm a firm believer in the freedom of speech and expression People should be free to act however they want in their own private space (and in most instances, in the public space as well). They should not be judged or labeled as a result. Yet, I'm not sure how I feel about cookies, as I believe, for the most part, that this is a privacy issue that gets too much attention.

While some may find it invasive that a company could potentially be looking at your browsing habits and as a result, catering their website to better fit your needs and desires, I find it convenient that the next time that I access the site, parts of it will be pre-loaded as I want it. Some worry that ESPN.com (or for the purposes of our discussion, Google) takes down some info about you to better serve you (and sell to you) the next time you visit the site. I don't. People often think that their actions are more important to massive companies than they actually are. Chances are, that if a cookie is placed on your machine by Amazon, Jeff Bezos isn't looking to use you to take over the world. It's probably so Amazon can give you those nifty recommendations the next time you stop by to check out the daily Gold Box sales. They may use some basic info about you to conduct some marketing. They probably aren't looking over your entire browsing history in order to see if you frequent adult oriented sites. Bezos could care less.

Still, I recognize the fear, the big brother mentality that accompanies this type of "harmless" cookie. I just don't buy it. It's something when a town places cameras at every intersection in town (hello, West Hartford!) and could feasibly track your cars every move (although once again, I'm thinking West Hartford has bigger issues on their mind than whether the white Prius driven by Kevin Simpson has passed over South Main Street yet. Is there a potential cause for concern here? Could cookies feasibly be manipulated to track your every move? Absolutely. Yet, my issues with privacy generally come with their inhibition of your everyday activities, when they get in the way of being able to live a normal life. But, when the "invasion of privacy" comes with faster load times, better website experiences and catered ads? I'll take my chances.

Who Exactly is Google's Client?

Colin posed this question last night and the more I think about it, the less I seem sure of an answer. Let's take a look at some possibilities:

1) The User- Google provides the search according to what you, the internet user, ask for.
2) The Sites Being Searched- Google provides the sites with an easy way for users to find it.
3) Advertisers- Google provides the platform for advertisers to get their message across.

I'm not even sure that these are all of the possible clients. Each have their own argument to go with them and each seem equally valid. What are some of the other clients that Google is invested in? Do they favor one over the other? Is the user really the main concern for Google or are they siding in a different way? I've got to admit that this question is really fascinating me. Previously, I had always thought that their primary client was me, the user. However, the sites that I'm searching for are being helped nearly as much, if not more so than I am. How else would I find obscure sites around the web? I'm really not sure.

Facebook, Malls and Greens

I like Matt's thoughts on Facebook, especially his comparison of Facebook being most like a mall. I had never really thought of the site in this manner but given the time and consideration, I'm surprised at how much those ads seem to grab my attention. Now, I don't necessarily click on them but they certainly divert my eye at times when I'm clicking through the site. However, I'm not sure that the mall and town green need to be mutually exclusive or in some respects, if they are even inseperable today.

As society has become increasingly materialistic, the mall has become the defacto meeting place for people of all ages for all reasons. Some get together specifically to shop for a certain item. Others, to shop for the sake of shopping. Others (I'm thinking teens here) seem to get together at malls just because it's a place to get together and hang out. My friends and I did it as teens as the prospect and idea of walking around a mall seemed far better than sitting in a basement.

I can't remember the last time, if ever, my friends have ever decided to get together at a town green (and I lived in Boston for a couple of years, decidedly underutilizing the Common). This wasn't due to any aversion to the outdoors (as a group, we're fairly adventurous) or really, anything specific. However, we would go to the mall in order to shop, eat, get out of the house. My question is then, has the mall become the new town green? Does the Facebook-as-mall idea change the site's intent or potential at all? I'm not so sure. If people are now using the the more capitalistic mall instead of the town green to meet, who's to say that Facebook can't do the same?