The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) announced today that it intends to award Google a $27 million sole source contract for visualization technology, the largest known contract between the Internet firm and a national security agency.
Amidst a surge in governmental requests for private user data, Google’s openness effort is lagging, as the release of Google’s second transparency report shows. The report, released Tuesday, is a welcome sign of the search engine’s commitment to openness, but it is not a big improvement over the initial report last April.
Google Instant is not for me. When I search, I don’t want Google to know where I am or what I like or to tell me things it thinks I am interested in. I don’t want a for-profit corporation to be what Sergey Brin wants Google to be – “the third half of your brain.”
Google has fired an engineer for accessing the user accounts of four minors, according Gawker media. David Barksdale stalked and spied upon the teenagers while working as a Site Reliability Engineer at Google’s Kirkland, WA, office. Google told Tech Crunch this is the second time it has fired an engineer for privacy violations.
Google’s emergence as a major defense contractor was underscored last week when the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency tweaked its Aug. 20 announcement of a sole-source contract to the search giant for visualization services.
Three Web pundits are asking: is the quality of the Google’s search product declining? These are not the defensive gripes of traditional journalists lamenting the demise of the newspaper business model. These are New Media partisans who say the quality of the Google search experience is declining.
At a certain point, fabulously successful people can grow fabulously out of touch with the world that the rest of us live in. Think of the late Michael Jackson. Think the hedge fund manager who was surprised that people were offended by his $3 million birthday party.
When Google and Verizon (G-V) announced their “joint policy framework” on net neutrality, the search giant denied its new position had been shaped by its alliance with the telecom giant.
The New York Times reported Monday that Google and Verizon reached their agreement on managing the Internet just as the Federal Communications Commission’s efforts to forge “a stronger agreement” were close to succeeding.
As protests against Google’s changing position on net neutrality mount online (here, here and here) and at the company’s Mountain View campus, it’s worth parsing the search giant’s official response.
The Google-Verizon statement on regulating the Internet isn’t business deal, the two companies say. Its a “legislative framework proposal” and a “a path to the open internet.” Web watchers aren’t buying it. It’s an alliance of two companies looking to lock in market advantages with political action.
Reports of a deal between Google and Verizon on “net neutrality’ are generating another public relations backlash against the Internet giant. The agreement, said the New York Times, “could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content’s creators are willing to pay for the privilege.
The report in Wired last week about a high-tech firm funded jointly by Google and the CIA, Recorded Future, not only signaled a growing skepticism about the most popular Internet search engine. It also pointed up the dangers of the lack of transparency poses for Google.