tanqueray

he's been talking a lot recently without releasing much at all. Wonder what he's got. If it's about when Schmidt was CEO why wait till now?

Although given that Google seems ever more obsessed with collecting/retaining data I guess it's just as relevant...

So why do they store indefinitely? If they stated a retention period openly they'd get much less criticism over privacy.

How does it benefit by keeping data forever though? Of what use is aged data?

I think the answer to the question in the last paragraph is 'yes'.

I do dispute that the brigade are 'well-meaning' though. It is often very much for their own ends, be that in their student union or their career. They are often willing to cause a lot of damage in the name of their cause.

There is some great literature coming through against it though; Tom Slater's "Unsafe Spaces" is excellent. As is lots of the recent stuff by Joanna Williams.

I'm struggling to think of some examples. Perhaps you could tell us what you have deemed to be "unacceptable".

Strawman. I never said I did.

I just pointed out that you can choose to get offended by small stuff or you can just get on with things...

After all, someone saying "smile" to someone else really is small stuff.

The question here is was what was written in that email offensive and not to be written in the workplace...

Good point.

I don't know the song myself. If I worked at Apple I'd have reported person 1 for not being inclusive enough...

Thanks for the links. I read the first one. I guess we just disagree.

I am of the opinion minor discomforts are things we have to deal with/adapt to. Especially when there is work to do. You seem to be of the opinion that personal discomforts are something that we should avoid causing as a matter of the upmost importance.

I think we have to agree to disagree.

Person 4's fascist solipsism is astounding. She has transferred the "toxicity" and "unacceptability"in her own mind onto the whole team.

A song was referred to but there was no actual mention of sexual assault. The song is not "completely unacceptable" as it is obviously commonly known and legally sold. It is therefore acceptable in the workplace, referred to as it actually was.

Says who? You and a few others? Lots of people disagree so maybe you are in a tough shit scenario here.

Unless you actually have got someone fired for an innocuous comment. Then it's tough shit for them, I suppose.

People have said that, or things along that line to me. I've said it to others.

"Would you ever say that to a male colleague? Would anyone?"

Out of context I'd imagine your question was about something that is actually serious or significant. Unbelievable.

"I'll remove that from things I say".

If there is no bad intent, why should you? The answer is that a snowflake could get you fired but the rhetorical question stands.

They have used it to help anonymize data when collaborating.

I think they'd have a lot more trust if they explicitly gave information on their data retention periods.

Does Google not have any interest in differential privacy practices?

The US has remarkably weak privacy laws, does it not? As in there aren't really any laws on data retention, pseudonymization etc. let me know if I've got the wrong impression.

And if "delete" means delete it's probably not an issue.

But does "delete" mean delete?

What would be so bad if they did go through a bad patch? I can't see it being like Yahoo's though.

Have been using tutanota (free). Servers are in Germany and have been quite happy but would like them to add a few features. Am going to upgrade anyway I think.

Did you delete the Gmail account?

Mine have always lasted for Macbooks, as I never take them out with me. Phones/iPads start fraying after a year or so if you chuck them in bags etc.

If some of these accounts have been deleted how has a hacker got a username and password for them?