Skip to main content

Too easily forgotten.

I don't really want to get caught up in the Google Privacy Policy fray because a) flamey controversy sets my teeth on edge and b) so much of it sounds like self-interested competitors and self-interested media-holes putting spins of various sort for either profit or attention and c), as far as I can tell, I don't much care. Maybe it's because I'm such a millenial; the internet is my home.
All the same, if you're not totally caught up on it here's a Slate article explaining the big problems with and some possible solutions for Google's Privacy Policy. I generally like Slate for most things interesting, though I would point out some irks I find in the article. But mainly I want to point out some different perspectives on this--my own, at the least--to maybe lend some depth to the discussion. Fat chance, but it's all I've got to say.

For one, I personally have more than one google account, one for porniness, one for everything else; I also have a separate user account on my computer for porniness so it's really easy to keep the two google accounts separate but still, the article omits that possibility or passes over it with hand waving. Yeah, as I'll even admit, it could get tricky if I didn't already have separate user accounts; I made the second account specifically to segregate that part of my life and make it inaccessible to others--ie, private. Private things kept in their private place. (I also separated that out to make it harder to give in to temptation; having to log out and log in to that user is sometimes enough to derail hardcore masturbatory timewasting.)

One thing I don't understand is why people are complaining about a unified user-id-ness. Yeah, I get how you might not want such-and-such information being visible to so-and-so, but frankly I've always lived as transparently as I could. If I were you, I'd ask: Why am I ashamed of this part of my life? Granted, as I've gotten older, I've come to appreciate wanting to keep somethings less visible. Certainly, certainly. I also understand that some people are much touchier about their infoz than I am. Certainly, certainly. Ultimately, I don't want to get involved in the debate serioulsy enough to engage those concerns. I just wanted to point out that some people don't feel so touchy.

The last thing I want to point out is the usefulness of this move. For those that aren't google fags like me, once you're logged into a google account it tends to follow you around the internet through its various services. But here's the thing: that particular feature of it doesn't creep me out, I find it extremely useful. I'm grateful that I can be in my gmail writing an email then hope over to google calendar to check availability and sidle over to google maps to make sure I have enough time to get there in time and then pop on blogger to talk about it; the less I have to stop and log in between each of them the better. Plus, I do believe Google is trying to help not herd us (laaaawl, punz).

An  important but I think too easily dismissed point is how their goal has been to simplify their privacy policies. This article from The Atlantic explains what a bitch and a half actually reading every privacy statement on the web would be. Google's reason for changing their privacy policies is simplicity. In light of The Atlantic article, that's actually a pretty big deal; it would take a long ass while to read 60-odd separate privacy policies (with likely many redundant portions) when now you can read just one. And yet everyone seems to dismiss this as frivolous or even spurious rationalizing before they dive into how violated they feel. Granted, their feelings of violation are theirs to feel, but at least now they can find out about it much more easily--by referring to a single policy instead of 60.


Other things that might interest you...

This moment: A tattoo.

So I read Mrs. Dalloway in high school, and it was perhaps the most beautiful thing I'd ever read. One passage in particular, very early in the book, hit me hard with my first experience of the sublime, and stayed with me—and led at last to my first tattoo.
In people’s eyes, in the swing, tramp, and trudge; in the bellow and the uproar; the carriages, motor cars, omnibuses, vans, sandwich men shuffling and swinging; brass bands; barrel organs; in the triumph and the jingle and the strange high singing of some aeroplane overhead was what she loved; life; London; this moment of June.  (Emphasis added; full paragraph included below. From the full text of the novel as made available by the University of Adelaide.)

The paragraph this is from, the 4th paragraph of the novel, is the 1st passage with the stream of consciousness the book is famous for; although self-limited here, the flow is no less gorgeous. In the passage, Clarissa is walking on a street to get those famous flowers herse…

Losing Doolittle.

I recently got to spend a few days at the lake house my family used to visit through most of my childhood; we no longer own it, and it turns out I missed it more deeply than I realized.

Anthony and I both got the week before NYC Pride off this year, so I contrived to get us a little time there. The cousins who own Greenshore gave Anthony and me permission to relax there for several days rather than just the 1 or 2 I had expected. Good god, I'm grateful for that.

I missed this place. Standing on the balcony, the porch, or the dock and looking out over the lake, I was reminded of the beauty and tranquility this lake represents for me. The meaning and memories, too.

This was always a place of solace and stability for me. We moved around a lot when I was a kid, but we always came back to this place. It had been in our family for generations before I was even born—if we'd been able to keep it, it would have been a solid 4 generations including mine. This was where I figured out I w…

Sarracenia 'Palmerpink.'

So I posted the other day about my rekindled carnivorous plant obsession—I mean, hobby. I mentioned, in passing, that I had "discovered" a possible cultivar, so here's the lowdown on what that means and what I meant.

The term "cultivar" is short for "cultivated variety," and signifies that a particular plant is so desirable and interesting that people want exact copies of it rather than simply seed from it. Some famous American pitcher plant (Sarracenia) cultivars include the legendary Adrian Slack, the massive Leah Wilkerson, and the classic Judith Hindle.

Part of how these come about is that, unlike horses x donkeys = mules and certain other hybrids, Sarracenia hybrids aren't sterile and can be crossed and recrossed without limit. Further, random chance can create crazy combinations of genes such that even hybrids between the same species—heck, even the same parents—can demonstrate quite the variety. More on that elsewhere.

Depending on how easy…