just a thought

[Fulvio]

Yeah, I hear that argument a lot. But the reality is that while they don't care about YOU specifically, they already know far more about you statistically than you realise, or can control. Even if one has the technical skills, motivation and perseverance, it is incredibly difficult not to leave digital footprints. And most people don't have any of the above, let alone all.

Witness the fact that of the 63 clicks on one of the pics I posted, not only are all but 4 from Windows machines (the least secure alternative), but fully 41 of the browsers are Internet Explorer, which everybody in IT will tell you is the absolute worst alternative known to man. The risks are way out of proportion to the dubious benefit of already coming preinstalled on every windows box, and therefore not requiring any additional effort. Its not like there aren't several excellent and easy alternatives, such as Firefox, Safari or Chrome to name but three.

At the end of the day, any security question comes down to a question of risk vs reward. If I know the risks, and I'm happy to accept them in exchange for some valuable rewards, great. If I'm not, also great. But far too many people don't know, don't care, and overreact to perceived threats, whether its tracking cookies, malware or forgotten suitcases on trains. Ignorance is not bliss.. its just.. you know.. ignorance.

[Ozcoins]

I agree with a lot of what you say,  but my conclusions are somewhat different to yours.
I think the proportion of people who have properly assessed risks vs reward of many services they use would be something close to zero.
I am not concerned all that much with statistics google have about groups of people (which may or may not be true in my case).
As an example the ABS suggested that the 23, 000, 000th Austrakian would be a boy called Jack, born in Western Sydney. If you had to take a guess, that is probably the most likely option,  but the chance of our being true is probably fairly remote.
If everything about you is in one place,  the potential for any type of abuse is much higher and the potential damage is much greater.
Someone with access to your data in gmail, groups and search history could easily target you for any type of crime.
Sounds almost bizarrely paranoid at this point doesn't it?
Let's say someone decides to steal a 1930 penny and they have access to googles dats.
A quick search and they find info on several people who have bought one over the last 5 years.
One of those people is "fulvio-ABC123@gmail.com"
With a bit more digging they know
-full name
-address
-medical history
They see emails and family photos so they know what you look like. They know that you are divorced and your kids live interstate.  That you live alone with a cat so no family to worry about.
They see that after buying the 1930 penny, you have done searches for bank safety deposit boxes and then for "ABC" safes and "XYZ" alarms.
They find an emailed receipt for installation of a safe and another for installation of an alarm.
Then they find email confirmation of a hotel booking on the gold coast for 2 weeks along with another for plane tickets.
You come back from your holiday to find your "XYZ" alarm was disabled and your medium size "ABC" safe containing your 1930 penny and other valuable items hss been stolen.  They knew they could not open it in advance but guessed at the contents and took the whole thing.
In your risk/reward calculations how do you even begin to properly assess they risks?  
You have no idea who had access to the data now or in the future.

[markn]

This forum is staying the way it is.  I can see the benefits of Google+ but I too don't want them controlling all my information.  Fulvio you've been pushing this barrow for a while and I'd appreciate it if you let it drop.

[Robster]

"And now we return to our Regular Programming." Hooray.!!

[Fulvio]

Oz, you're absolutely correct. That's one of the reasons I have not one, but five browsers running.

Mark, it has nothing to do with the forum, any more than any of the other forums, groups or communities do.

[ausjack]

just a little :off_topic: from where I started, two pages and only five voted :scratch_one-s_head:
make that six now sorry as Jeff slied in while I was typing :laugh2:

[Nevol]

I only just realised there was a poll, so I've voted now too. :angel:

[robbiegal]

just a little :off_topic: from where I started, two pages and only five voted :scratch_one-s_head:

make that six now sorry as Jeff slied in while I was typing :laugh2:

I thought that Mark had said, thanks but no to a fund raising raffle to cover forum $$ costs

He went on to suggest that if you want to have a raffle for charity then that would be ok

or have I got all that wrong?

[Fordprefect]

Think he did a page or two ago. :idea: