Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 16 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Tuesday March 19 2019, @02:28AM   Printer-friendly
from the imagine-if-it-were-facebook dept.

The Internet Archive is working to preserve public Google+ posts before it shuts down

Google is set to begin deleting data from its beleaguered social network, Google+ in April, but before that happens, the Internet Archive and the ArchiveTeam say that they are working to preserve public posts on the platform before they vanish forever.

In a post on Reddit, the sites announced that they had begun their efforts to archive the posts using scripts to capture and back up the data in an effort to preserve it. The teams say that their efforts will only encompass posts that are currently available to the public: they won't be able to back up posts that are marked private or deleted. They also urge people who don't want their content to be archived to delete their accounts, and pointed to a procedure to request the removal of specific content. They also note that they won't be able to capture everything: comment threads have a limit of 500 comments, "but only presents a subset of these as static HTML. It's not clear that long discussion threads will be preserved." They also say that images and video won't be preserved at full resolution.

Related: Google+ Shut Down After Data Breach and Cover-Up are Exposed
Senators Demand Answers About Google+ Breach; Project Dragonfly Undermines Google's Neutrality
Google+ Bug Exposes Non-Public Profile Data for 52 Million Users
Death of Google+ Causing Angst


Original Submission

Related Stories

Google+ Shut Down After Data Breach and Cover-Up are Exposed 18 comments

Google+ shutting down after users' data is exposed

Google is shutting down much of its social network, Google+, after user data was left exposed. It said a bug in its software meant information that people believed was private had been accessible by third parties. Google said up to 500,000 users had been affected.

According to a report in the Wall Street Journal, the company knew about the issue in March but did not disclose it. The WSJ quoted an internal Google memo that said doing so would draw "immediate regulatory interest".

In a statement, the firm said the issue was not serious enough to inform the public. "Our Privacy and Data Protection Office reviewed this issue, looking at the type of data involved, whether we could accurately identify the users to inform, whether there was any evidence of misuse, and whether there were any actions a developer or user could take in response. None of these thresholds were met here."

Also at The Verge, Engadget, and CNBC.


Original Submission

Politics: Senators Demand Answers About Google+ Breach; Project Dragonfly Undermines Google's Neutrality 12 comments

Republican Senators Demand Answers about Google+ Cover-up

Senators Thune, Wicker, and Moran Letter to Google

takyon: Three Senators have written a letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai requesting responses to several questions about the recent Google+ breach.

Also at Reuters, Ars Technica, and The Verge.

How Google's China Project Undermines its Claims to Political Neutrality

Submitted via IRC for chromas

How Google's China project undermines its claims to political neutrality

The company's official position on content moderation remains political neutrality, a spokeswoman told me in an email:

Google is committed to free expression — supporting the free flow of ideas is core to our mission. Where we have developed our own content policies, we enforce them in a politically neutral way. Giving preference to content of one political ideology over another would fundamentally conflict with our goal of providing services that work for everyone.

Of course, it's impossible to read the report or Google's statement without considering Project Dragonfly. According to Ryan Gallagher's ongoing reporting at The Intercept, Google's planned Chinese search engine will enable anything but the free flow of ideas. Even in an environment where American users are calling for tech platforms to limit users' freedoms in exchange for more safety and security, many still recoil at the idea of a search engine that bans search terms in support of an authoritarian regime.

And that's the unresolvable tension at the heart of this report. Almost all of us would agree that some restrictions on free speech are necessary. But few of us would agree on what those restrictions should be. Being a good censor — or at least, a more consistent censor — is within Google's grasp. But being a politically neutral one is probably impossible.

See also: Senator Says Google Failed to Answer Key Questions on China

Related: Leaked Transcript Contradicts Google's Denials About Censored Chinese Search Engine


Original Submission #1Original Submission #2Original Submission #3

Google+ Bug Exposes Non-Public Profile Data for 52 Million Users 18 comments

Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984

Google+ bug exposes non-public profile data for 52 million users

Two months after disclosing an error that exposed the private profile data of almost 500,000 Google+ users, Google on Monday revealed a new leak that affects more than 52 million people. The programming interface bug allowed developers to access names, ages, email addresses, occupations, and a wealth of other personal details even when they were set to be nonpublic.

The bug was introduced in a release that went live at an undisclosed date in November and was fixed a week later, Google officials said in a blog post. During the time the bug was active, developers of apps that requested permission to view profile information that a user had added to their Google+ profile received permission to view profile information about that user even when the details were set to not-public. What's more, apps with access to users' Google+ profile data had permission to access non-public profile data that other Google+ users shared with the consenting user. In all, the post said, 52.5 million users are affected.


Original Submission

Death of Google+ Causing Angst 30 comments

It's been a long time coming but soon the wishful thinking social media site alternative Google+ is shutting down for good. Or for bad as the case may be for the hundreds of thousands of users who still call Google+ a home and who are severely lacking in options for a place to move to. There's always Facebook, but given the anti-Facebook culture prevalent in the G+ network over the years it won't be an option for many. While communities debate the move, admins of communities size up the prospect of migrating years of data to another platform. Google plans to execute the shutdown in April 2019.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by acid andy on Tuesday March 19 2019, @02:50AM (2 children)

    by acid andy (1683) on Tuesday March 19 2019, @02:50AM (#816768) Homepage Journal

    from the imagine-if-it-were-facebook dept.

    Puh-lease! I'd prefer not to be plagued with horrendous nightmares, thank you very much!

    --
    If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
    • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday March 19 2019, @10:08AM

      by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Tuesday March 19 2019, @10:08AM (#816878) Homepage
      If it were facebook, nothing of value would be lost, so the internet archive wouldn't need to bother.
      Then again, I'm not sure I ever saw anything of value on G+, mostly as their pages rendered blank without JS enabled.
      I'm also not sure I ever saw anything of value on Orkut, which was their previous attempt at social networking. Maybe they're just not good at this game. I'd have thought it would make more sense for them in particular to just scrape and datamine, and let someone else waste time and money with all the storage and management of the source data.
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 2) by martyb on Thursday March 21 2019, @12:38AM

      by martyb (76) on Thursday March 21 2019, @12:38AM (#817638) Journal

      from the imagine-if-it-were-facebook dept.

      Puh-lease! I'd prefer not to be plagued with horrendous nightmares, thank you very much!

      Not sure what you are referencing: Using Facebook, or the prospect of trying to back it up it?

      I'd like to think that there are preservationists out there already considering the challenge of doing that and how they would go about it.

      --
      Wit is intellect, dancing.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 19 2019, @04:46AM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 19 2019, @04:46AM (#816807)

    there were like, what, 33 1/3 people on google+?

    • (Score: 2) by Arik on Tuesday March 19 2019, @05:05AM

      by Arik (4543) on Tuesday March 19 2019, @05:05AM (#816814) Journal
      Plus a few million essentially blank pages, where anything you did find posted was unintentional, and likely embarrassing to the poster.
      --
      If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
    • (Score: 2) by Pino P on Tuesday March 19 2019, @09:34PM

      by Pino P (4721) on Tuesday March 19 2019, @09:34PM (#817134) Journal

      Steve Yegge is on G+, and his essay there about "Notes from the Mystery Machine Bus" [google.com] about software liberals and software conservatives has been influential in the Game Boy homebrew development scene. Liberals engineer for rapid development (the "move fast and break things" mentality); conservatives engineer for long-term provable reliability. (The concept is orthogonal to social and economic conservatism, as they are to each other.) I sent him an invitation to Google Hangouts a couple days ago with intent to ask permission to archive this essay elsewhere, but he hasn't accepted it yet.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 19 2019, @04:35PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 19 2019, @04:35PM (#817008)

    As in topic. Archive Team is not Internet Archive, probably IA put their crawlers in too, but AT is running their "voluntary botnet" for it.
    More interesting thing, there's a discussion in AT how it could be possible to backup a whole IA :).

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 19 2019, @06:41PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 19 2019, @06:41PM (#817091)

    maybe it will help teach a lesson about using saas shit.

(1)