Guide to Quitting Google

Why would I want to quit Google? Don’t wear a Tin hat using it and it does so much actual Good Stuff, such as referred to above by JCD. I want more of that Good Stuff! I will take the (mostly imagined/imaginary) Tin Hat stuff. I don’t care that they have me on their database, it helps them connect to what I want or request from Google.

Guess it all depends on individual choice, which is what makes us all individuals. Also depends on your definition and opinions about what has suddenly become seen as Being Evil in Google!?

Good link though Wasbit, for those who do want to Quit Google.

You do not have to quit just use the GDPR options to turn off what you dislike – for example tracking. If Google ‘cheat’ they face massive fines so probably will not do so.

Bob, that is a view very close to my own. In the past and far away I have worked closely with an organisation trying to look after local stability. I learned that the only value they assign to ordinary people is that they have ordinary and largely boring lives that do not repay close scrutiny. Now I admit that the reason I regularly walk the ways I do could be that I need to make dead letter drops in several places, or it could be that with two dogs to look after from Sunday evening to Friday evening with sometimes weekends is that they are better for two walks each. This means that I get four walks per day. The boredom of visiting food shops, chemists, doctors and hospitals, should rapidly become apparent, frankly so what if Google ‘see’ all this activity, others do as well. HMRC no doubt have a pretty clear picture of what I spend, where the money comes from and where it goes, and if they don’t then the credit reference agencies can fill in many/most of the missing pieces. The ANPR cameras must get bored seeing me travel the same old routes, I know the cars and I do.

What worries me far more is that the likes of the Somali in Australia was known to be a source of concern before he ran amok, but there was no way to stop his attempt at a rampage before he acted out his sick fantasy.

As for one of ‘our’ local agencies taking an interest in me, now that would be a cause of concern since it would mean that they were at risk of taking their eye off a real threat. With the exception of sending ham fisted goons to murder or trying to manipulate events, Russia usually works in rather more mass market ways. They know that a deaths are good for their business of destabilisation. However, if enough people worry what caused the disturbance each time the lights flicker, that is a result for them; it achieves the one thing that they crave, a reduction in confidence in other governments.

China also wants to displace confidence, but it also wants to gain as much technological capability as it can as a lever to diminish the apparent skill level in none Chinese entities. Unless you have something of value to them, frankly why would they waste time on you?

So, while I have no obvious presence on any antisocial networks, I see no reason to have the slightest care about Google, or a supermarket, or an internet trader or 20, knowing what I have either taken an interest in or bought, they are just a few in a long line of data miners.

I agree that the first step has to be to minimise your own on line footprint, though having said that the main reason is not state actors as such but the ‘crime state’, a bigger and more lucrative ‘state’ than most. While many become targets for on line fraud due to such as their gamer habit, that is one area that I have no contact with so I will abstain from comments except to say that, as ever care does need to be taken. I might go as far as to agree that a dedicated on line profile for the activity might be justified, though perhaps as ever the embroidery should be limited. To me of greater harm are some of the disinformation campaigns and there have been many. Very few are aimed at people as targets, most are scattergun efforts designed to undermine confidence, such as the ‘anti vaccination’ efforts or those designed to stir up ill feelings on any and all political topics.

You are correct to point out that targetting indirect targets in order to hit real targets of value is rife at the moment, though that is one where my value profile is probably on the negative side of the bar.

I have no objection to minimising on line foot prints, whether it is the simple and obvious, e.g. not telling the world that you are or will be away on holiday leaving the house vulnerable, (and thus risking voiding your insurance into the bargain) or avoiding personal publicity activities all together. I totally agree that putting out personally identifiable information that could act against your interests in future is straight out dumb. However, none of this falls into the Google or customer-supplier trading information that has been the staple of good customer relations for years. In this context it is interesting to see how good customer-supplier relationship models have had their wheels come off in recent years, yes insurance industry I have you in my sights. Established customers should not be treated as tethered milk cows to be taken for every penny they have.

I wonder how much of the anti Google sentiment has been stirred up by those whose illegal activities would/could be exposed by a Google search or too? There have been a steady trickle of cases of dodgy traders trying to sue victims of their dodgy ways to suppress reports of their malfeasance, just look at the current bough ha ha about non disclosure agreements.

Richard wrote:

I wonder how much of the anti Google sentiment has been stirred up by those whose illegal activities would/could be exposed by a Google search or too? T

Quasi-illegal also falls into that category. The Iranians, Russians and Chinese caught a whole load of CIA spies simply by Googling! Ars link

” With reference to the alleged spy round ups, I have said it before but it clearly stands to be repeated, the recruitment of unskilled and possibly unsuitable staff to the so called intelligence service in the USA is a real stain on their personal management abilities. Their performance reminds me too much of an old Navy Lark script, but is that Google’s fault? ”

Definitely not Richard!

A good reason why the USA rely so much upon UK Intelligence sources. As once expressed to me by a UK Int. spook in BAOR: “They could not find their (Rs’s) in the dark with a torch!”

Bob Williams wrote:

” With reference to the alleged spy round ups, I have said it before but it clearly stands to be repeated, the recruitment of unskilled and possibly unsuitable staff to the so called intelligence service in the USA is a real stain on their personal management abilities. Their performance reminds me too much of an old Navy Lark script, but is that Google’s fault? ” Definitely not Richard! A good reason why the USA rely so much upon UK Intelligence sources. As once expressed to me by a UK Int. spook in BAOR: “They could not find their (Rs’s) in the dark with a torch!”

More than 45 years ago in a land far away I lived very close to the then USA embassy. There had been a sales period in the local shops and several of us had bought long lenses. We were up on the roof trying them out when the embassy lowered their flag.

The next day we had several gentlemen with very short hair cuts call round and, after a long rather monosyllabic exchange from our side I decided that this was not being very friendly. So I gave them a short ‘welcome speech’  along the lines of;

‘If you want it intercepted, diverted recorded or blocked we are the team you need.’

They left shortly after that and  little while later the embassy moved.