Google privacy furore from feed reader sharing (and 56 geeks)

Hello again. It's IT Blogwatch: in which Google gets blasted over privacy concerns, when it's discovered that the feed "sharing" feature in fact shares a feed! Not to mention 56 kinds of geek...

Felipe Hoffa rants:

As each day Google hoards more of your data there is an implicit deal that makes this possible: You give Google your private data, while they keep it private. That deal would fail miserably is someday Google decided unilaterally to share your data with more people. For example, with all your Gmail contacts. Many people fear that this might happen someday, but they don't need to wait anymore as it has already happened. [more]

Erick Schonfeld explains:

A couple weeks ago, Google turned on a new feature in its feed reader that lets you share posts with anyone in your Gmail or Gtalk contact list ... [But] just because I’ve sent you an e-mail in the past does not make us friends, and it certainly does not mean that you want to keep track of every random blog post I decide to share ... If we’ve learned anything from Facebook’s Beacon experience, it is to give users of social services as much control as possible over who can see their data. [more]

This feature ruined AnnaB's Christmas:

I sent a share a few days ago that I thought would only go to a few politically-like-minded friends. I didn't realize that because I had chatted with him in GChat, it would also go to my brother, who is of a different political persuasion ... My whole family has taken sides over this divisive political issue, and several of them are not speaking. I kid you not ... [Google] can't change the rules without telling anyone ... the changes [it] makes have real effects on our lives, including our relationships with the people we contact. [more]

Anthony Richard Hung is even-handed:

Ultimately this is how you define the word share, and in this case, how Google defines the word “share” ... it makes the people who are complaining about this service feel like whiny crybabies ... don’t they understand what the word “shared” means? But on the other hand, I think its clear that people who feel violated don’t share the same definition of the word or the term, even if Google had outlined things in their terms of service (which no one reads). [more]

Mathew Ingram works it:

Much of the moaning about “privacy” is just ridiculous ... I’ve been trying to remain calm ... [but] I can’t help pointing out that much of the moaning about “privacy” is just ridiculous ... Are the people who are complaining non-English speakers? That seems unlikely. So the idea of “sharing” items on your Google Reader must be one they are at least glancingly familiar with. [more]

Robert Scoble enumerates the possibilities:

1. I could call people idiots for not understanding the meaning of the word [shared].
2. I could call the Google Reader team idiots for not putting ... Granular Privacy Controls ... into its social networking and sharing features.
3. I could call the media idiots for not explaining these features better and for even making it sound like stuff that isn’t shared at all is being shared (which absolutely isn’t true).

I’m going to take #2. [more]

Steve Rubel lends a hand:

[Here's an] undocumented trick that lets you share items with a private group and no one else ... The key is to make use of Google's underutilized tagging feature ... create a new tag ... make that tag - and only that tag - public ... share the tag page only with people you trust ... . They can subscribe to this tag page ... no one will be able to find this page unless they know the secret tag name. [more]

Google's Chrix Finne prostrates himself:

We'd hoped that making it easier to share with the people you chat with often would be useful and interesting, but we underestimated the number of users who were using the Share button to send stories to a limited number of people. We're looking at ways to make sharing more granular and flexible ... If you've already shared some items, you can click "Manage friends" in the upper-left box and then "move or clear your shared items"; from there you can select a tag to which you can transfer your list of shared items. [more]

Louis Gray has a haiku:

Share your feeds again.
It's safe! No privacy bug!
Google Reader blinks. [more]

And finally...

• The 56 Geeks Project
  

Buffer overflow:

• The Old New Thing : Microthink: If you can't measure it, then it doesn't exist
• Patently-O: Counting Design Patents
• Michael Rose: Santa's present for Real Steve: AAPL $200
• Tom Olzak, IT Toolbox: Incident response assumes less than 100% protection
• 4sysops: Is Windows (XP and Vista) five times as secure as Mac OS X?
• Beyond The Bits: Memory Makes The World Go Around

Other Computerworld bloggers:

• Douglas Schweitzer: Happy New Year; Now try to keep up
• Mike Elgan: Is THIS Apple's 'new Newton'?
• Sharon Machlis: Love my new non-iPhone Centro Smart Phone
• Angela Gunn: David Airey won't back down
• Shark Tank: Oops!
• Douglas Schweitzer: Keep your space small
• Ian Lamont: A digital native discovers the Web
• Shark Tank: This is why we save all those boxes
• Shark Tank: How to save money
• Douglas Schweitzer: Security is more than just an OS
• Shark Bait: Old and short goodies

Richi Jennings is an independent analyst/adviser/consultant, specializing in blogging, email, and spam. A 20 year, cross-functional IT veteran, he is also an analyst at Ferris Research. You too can pretend to be Richi's friend on Facebook, or just use boring old email: blogwatch@richi.co.uk.

Previously in IT Blogwatch:

• Mozilla weaves web OS in cloud (and bad haircut day)
• ThinkSecret RIP after Apple settlement (and empty Sun)
• 700 MHz auction bidders revealed by FCC (and cancelcancel)