<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google calls for world privacy code</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13317/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13317</link>
	<description>p2pnet.net - reader powered</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:47:36 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Brian Damage</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13317/comment-page-1#comment-176502</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Damage</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 18:51:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13317#comment-176502</guid>
		<description>The privacy study mentioned was highly dubious, and the facts stated in the text contradicted the conclusions drawn in the assignment of scores.

When Yahoo, AOL, Microsoft, and Google were pressed by the US government to surrender millions of &quot;anonymous&quot; search queries in the name of &quot;child safety&quot;, Google was the only company to refuse and take the matter to court.  Google won the case, meaning the other search companies had provided the data unnecessarily.  All these companies scored higher than Google in this privacy study.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The privacy study mentioned was highly dubious, and the facts stated in the text contradicted the conclusions drawn in the assignment of scores.</p>
<p>When Yahoo, AOL, Microsoft, and Google were pressed by the US government to surrender millions of &#8220;anonymous&#8221; search queries in the name of &#8220;child safety&#8221;, Google was the only company to refuse and take the matter to court.  Google won the case, meaning the other search companies had provided the data unnecessarily.  All these companies scored higher than Google in this privacy study.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13317/comment-page-1#comment-176495</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 18:23:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13317#comment-176495</guid>
		<description>&quot;I know the antipathy stems from the advertising repudiation of your site&quot;

Not at all. I say the same about Apple, Microsoft, and all the rest of them.

Cheers!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I know the antipathy stems from the advertising repudiation of your site&#8221;</p>
<p>Not at all. I say the same about Apple, Microsoft, and all the rest of them.</p>
<p>Cheers!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reader's Write</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13317/comment-page-1#comment-176478</link>
		<dc:creator>Reader's Write</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 17:10:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13317#comment-176478</guid>
		<description>Doubleclick is not the story here, the warning by the privacy commisioner of canada over google streetview is. This is not atruistic, oh we all need better privacy standards. It&#039;s blame canada for having too-strong legislation that interfers with their product; so lets argue for a international balance, knowing full well that any such consultation would bring in european/american privacy standards that dont cover things like street view at all, and quite frankly don&#039;t hold a candle to canada&#039;s privacy standards.

Google simply isn&#039;t doing this because they want to protect privacy, they&#039;re doing it because they want to reduce canada&#039;s standards. Screw that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Doubleclick is not the story here, the warning by the privacy commisioner of canada over google streetview is. This is not atruistic, oh we all need better privacy standards. It&#8217;s blame canada for having too-strong legislation that interfers with their product; so lets argue for a international balance, knowing full well that any such consultation would bring in european/american privacy standards that dont cover things like street view at all, and quite frankly don&#8217;t hold a candle to canada&#8217;s privacy standards.</p>
<p>Google simply isn&#8217;t doing this because they want to protect privacy, they&#8217;re doing it because they want to reduce canada&#8217;s standards. Screw that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reader's Write</title>
		<link>http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13317/comment-page-1#comment-176448</link>
		<dc:creator>Reader's Write</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:38:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.p2pnet.net/story/13317#comment-176448</guid>
		<description>Out of all the major net companies, google seems the most altruistic. Providing free online office applications, maps, mail, and other applications. As well as supporting open source through the summer of code. They can also be quite innovative at times.

I know the antipathy stems from the advertising repudiation of your site, but this company is one of the better ones out there. If you want to censure someone, do it to Microsoft, they are far more worth of your wrath.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Out of all the major net companies, google seems the most altruistic. Providing free online office applications, maps, mail, and other applications. As well as supporting open source through the summer of code. They can also be quite innovative at times.</p>
<p>I know the antipathy stems from the advertising repudiation of your site, but this company is one of the better ones out there. If you want to censure someone, do it to Microsoft, they are far more worth of your wrath.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
