Google Plus-One coming to ATS on a trial basis...

reply to post by Stormdancer777


That's going to backfire on Microsoft. Google Aps for business -- the focus of the spoof video -- doesn't scan the emails or display ads.

And in reality, is probably more secure that Microsoft email server products for business, where just about any IT staffer can read or alter the emails of anyone in the office.

reply to post by AdAstra


I understand your concern and it is a valid one. But if I were a Justin Beiber fan I probably wouldn't want information about Afghanistan. I would have more important things to worry about like who he's dating. When I grow up though and my tastes change, Google will figure out what they are in the same way that they are figuring it out now. I'm not seeing anything wrong with this.

My point is that one persons censorship is another persons streamlining. They more than likely do this for the purpose of keeping you as close to the information that you want, and products you buy, as they can. If you are trying to find something specific and you start getting sidetracked by a lot of information that you don't care about, that's your prerogative.

We all live, work, and play in our own little "niche", and what we do on the computer is no exception. All Google is really doing is streamlining what we are shown based on our niche interests. If those interests change, which will be evident in the constant use of different keywords than before, what Google will feed you will change as well. Google or Bing or Yahoo have no interest in feeding you what they want you to see. If they did that you would go to a competitor. This is business and they want yours. They want your traffic and your clicks. They could care less if you are interested in the dating habits of goats or the latest NASA news. What they are interested in is giving you quicker access to what you want.

Originally posted by Common Good
ATS teaming up with Google.

Oh what a great plan.

This has GOT to end well.

Playin with fire my friends.


I for one, will be accessing my account settings to turn it off.

I'm with you on that. So how do you turn it off?

reply to post by AuranVector


Go to "tools" on the bar above, then deactivate the function in the settings on theat page.

Originally posted by nyk537

Originally posted by pop_science
ATS making bank.

You guys just don't get it.

If you and others are really that concerned with what's going on then just opt out and stay away. Nobody is forcing you to use ATS or participate in anything that goes on here.

Wow.

With all due respect old friend.... The staff doesn't exactly seem to be very enlightened... It seems we have a case of two groups unwilling to listen...


I think what should matter are these words " MEMBER DRIVEN SITE"...


Not money.

Originally posted by nerbot
reply to post by AuranVector

 

Go to "tools" on the bar above, then deactivate the function in the settings on theat page.

Thank you, Nerbot, for that. But when I go to Tools "Account" settings, all I see under "Google Plus" is whether or not to hide or display "Google Plus" -- I see nothing other than that -- does "hiding" this deactivate Google Plus?

AV

Originally posted by AuranVector

Originally posted by nerbot
reply to post by AuranVector

 

Go to "tools" on the bar above, then deactivate the function in the settings on theat page.

Thank you, Nerbot, for that. But when I go to Tools "Account" settings, all I see under "Google Plus" is whether or not to hide or display "Google Plus" -- I see nothing other than that -- does "hiding" this deactivate Google Plus?

AV

edit on 31-7-2011 by AuranVector because: (no reason given)

Apperently not. I deactivated it, but when i mouse over Google + when logged out, My name appears in it. So something is active

Originally posted by AuranVector

Originally posted by nerbot
reply to post by AuranVector

 

Go to "tools" on the bar above, then deactivate the function in the settings on theat page.

Thank you, Nerbot, for that. But when I go to Tools "Account" settings, all I see under "Google Plus" is whether or not to hide or display "Google Plus" -- I see nothing other than that -- does "hiding" this deactivate Google Plus?

AV

edit on 31-7-2011 by AuranVector because: (no reason given)

If you read the thread you will see that Google+ is only "activated" if the widget is clicked on, otherwise it is irrelevant and just displayed as a possible function.

There is a Firefox and Chrome addon that blocks these kind of social rating widgets. NOT an "adblocker" which are not allowed on the site so if you're that worried install it and feel happier.

Can't remember what it's called but an addon search will find it for you.

Hope that helps.

Just another digital trail....besides google+ is silly, bunch of my friends and I spent a few minutes checking it out then swiftly returned to fb.

Btw, Skeptic, do you secretly wish a life of crime by producing and selling methamphetamine.... and killing people? haha...great show

Havent we seen companies like google be forced to hand over information to those on power?
I thought I have seen this in the news just recently.
You say there in no information exchange, however if one chooses to participate in the + then are they not open to being searched?

Here it is....interesting description (underlined by me)

Share Me Not

Did you know that buttons like these allow Facebook, Google, LinkedIn, and others to track your online browsing activities on every site that includes one of these buttons, even if you never click the buttons and (in some browsers) even if you have third-party cookies disabled?

Kinda goes against what S.O. was saying here:

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
For those who care not to participate, the "widget" gathers no analytics or other data by appearing on the page.

Any comments?

reply to post by nerbot


That's an incorrect statement with regards to +1, but it is correct about the FB widget IF the webmaster allows the full functioning of the FB widget. That's why we don't. I don't know about Linkedin.

FB's widget, when fully functional, does send data back to FB's server, nothing identifiable but, more than just the URL to the ATS page you want to share, and that's against our privacy policy.

The +1 widget doesn't send any data to Google other than a link to the page you used the widget on, and that's ONLY if you have a +1 account and you are logged into it at the time you use the widget.

WRT +1, if you don't have a Google +1 account the widget is meaningless and does nothing. If you have a +1 account but don't want it associated with your ATS use, either log off +1 before coming to ATS or never click the widget here. Again, all it's gong to do if you do click it while logged into your +1 account is send the ATS URL you want to share to your circle of friends, or, whatever people you select to see your +1's.

When you're logged into +1 Google puts a cookie on your browser that tells Google you're logged in (just like every other site on the internet), that's why when you hold your cursor over the +1 widget it shows you your Google user name. That info isn't "going" anywhere, it's simply a cookie in your browser interacting with the widget and displaying your user name to, you.

Springer...

reply to post by Springer


Maybe you should write to the people at The National Science Foundation and tell them they shouldn't make false claims for their product and should be more clear.

The response would be interesting.

reply to post by nerbot


Google may have widgets and other things that can track and record what people do on the internet, if they do I believe all of them are voluntary and similar to the "Alexa Panel" www.alexa.com .


My point is that the +1 widget is not as they describe, if you notice they don't specify what Google widget or product they are making the statement about.

Clarity is lacking and I'm sure Google will address it if they think it's necessary.

Springer...

The google +1 is among the examples,I'm pretty sure its not for show.

Originally posted by Taupin Desciple

And I understand your perspective.
Thing is, I don't think Google's current search techniques work, and I don't have any reason to use an application that is painting with me someone e else's brush.

In my experience it really has drastically reduced the scope of information for any given user (at least as Google perceives it), because - apparently - the logarhythms that interpret the array of the keywords gathered are incredibly stupid.

We all live, work, and play in our own little "niche", and what we do on the computer is no exception.

See, that's just it: my "niche" is not particularly small. I am NOT saying this to blow my trumpet, I am telling this in order to make a point.

I am no Justin Bieber (thank God for small mercies), but I have very little interest in Afghanistan myself. I do have many other interests, however, and I used to use Google in up to six languages at any given time. I would have thought that, if nothing else, would throw Google off balance when trying to determine my "profile".

Maybe it did, but the fact remains I am being served results that do not include websites that I KNOW were listed during previous searches, more than a year ago. (The websites didn't disappear; and even if they had, the caches would still show.)

Also, which is most annoying, whenever I cross any country border it keeps pushing local results, in local languages, that I do not always understand and have no interest in using, or I would have searched for them myself.

And the most infuriating thing: for the past year or so you have to use quotes around EVERY SINGLE WORD you enter, otherwise it will serve you "sound-alikes" and all sorts of variants of the word.
So, there go a few more seconds of my time - per search - that I'll never see again, thanks to Google!

So, my options are to either invest an awful lot of time playing tricks on Google to help it expand its "mind"- or use some meta-search machine, like DogPile. Which is what I do. It's not perfect but it's better than Google alone.

To bring this to the point of the current thread: I just don't think one should give Google any more latitude than it already has. It is a clearly flawed, insensitive application, produced by a mercenary giant that has little interest in serving their actual users, counter-productive as it may sound.

Originally posted by nerbot

Originally posted by AuranVector

Originally posted by nerbot
reply to post by AuranVector

 

Go to "tools" on the bar above, then deactivate the function in the settings on theat page.

Thank you, Nerbot, for that. But when I go to Tools "Account" settings, all I see under "Google Plus" is whether or not to hide or display "Google Plus" -- I see nothing other than that -- does "hiding" this deactivate Google Plus?

AV

edit on 31-7-2011 by AuranVector because: (no reason given)

If you read the thread you will see that Google+ is only "activated" if the widget is clicked on, otherwise it is irrelevant and just displayed as a possible function.

There is a Firefox and Chrome addon that blocks these kind of social rating widgets. NOT an "adblocker" which are not allowed on the site so if you're that worried install it and feel happier.

Can't remember what it's called but an addon search will find it for you.

Hope that helps.

Thank you for your help, Nerbot. It really does help.

No communication between Google and ATS.

Well,

Had yall not let the devil in the front door this thread wouldnt be here anyway now would it?

Wondering more about yall day by day.

BIG WARNING

OK this Google plus is a big mistake and i did't vote for it and it allows any site that has the google plus button to pull you're name from google if you are logged into GMail or maybe justs needs a google cookie.

The code for the button looks like
g:plusone /g:plusone
//Needed to edit the line above else it turned into a google button


() [
var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/_javascript'; po.async = true;
po_ = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js';
var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s);
])();

The _javascript returned over SSL sets the image for the button and also sets the title of the button to you're name that is returned from googles servers

it's easy to embed some code in these pages with a timer that uses document.getelementbyid('GoogleButton'); and to then pull the name out and use something like ajax or json to fire the name back to ATS servers.

People on site like this don't like being watched by big brother and i for one will be blocking requests to ''https://apis.google.com'

Yes i was right

if you put a div around the code like this ( missing)

div id="A1"
g:plusone /g:plusone
/div
and then do script like

window.setTimeout("ReadName();", 10000);
function ReadName() [
var S1 = document.scripts[0];
var S2 = document.scripts[1];
var S3 = document.scripts[2];
var F = window.frames[0];
var D = document.get("A1");
]

Turns out S3 is the script in the page, S2 is the script from googles SSL that loads another script from another SSL server into S1

Read the InnerHTML of 'D' to get at a dynamic Iframe and then look at the _ to extract the google ID without getting access violations.

The src has

jsh=r%3Bgc%2F32755902-28b3fe20#

and

id=I1_1312263866640;

jsh stays the same unless you delete cookies and i'm not sure what id does yet.

bit of Json or Ajax and you can post the values back to you're own server so that you can track people who have deleted you're cookie.

Simple realy.

the full UL for the iframe is very big and looks like

"https://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Flocalhost%2Edit%2FDirec%2FData.html&size=standard&count=true&db=1&hl= en-US&
jsh=r%3Bgc%2F22777302-28b3fe20#
id=I1_13126794439174&parent=http%3A%2F%2Flocalhost&rpctoken=547717758&_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe"

also note that the second request for javascriot also has something that looks like a tracking ID in it because it's too big to be a version number.

Google is trying to hide something by using SSL so developers can not expose what they are doing with the script but i will crack that another time using BHO's