Comments on: Cuil’s Incredible Privacy Policy

By: How the “Magic” of the Market Protects Privacy

How the “Magic” of the Market Protects Privacy — Thu, 12 May 2011 14:13:09 +0000

[...] to remove an oppressive clause from the Chrome end user license agreement. Google competitor Cuil made a run at the search behemoth based on privacy that year, something I noted briefly then (and Ryan and I discussed in the comments). I’ve [...]

By: FTC Chair Warns Regulation on Behavioral Advertising Imminent | The Technology Liberation Front

Sun, 02 Aug 2009 19:12:43 +0000

[...] Cuil, a search engine launched in 2008, promises to never log IP addresses or even use cookies (as Jim has noted). Other anonymity solutions rely on secure virtual tunnels that can mask users’ actual IP [...]

By: Jim Harper

Jim Harper — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:52:11 +0000

I agree that this is a good example of the market providing privacy (or at least seeking to) consistent with consumer demand (which, of course, is distinct from consumer-advocate demand).

As a consumer myself, I don't assume that there's a good reason for Google's data retention policy. Most IT systems collect information by default, without regard to need and without balancing privacy considerations, so I assume that Google fell into the habit of long data-retention terms and that they may not have a fully justifiable reason for doing so, all things considered.

Trying to dictate data retention terms from the outside (i.e. through regulation) would be a fool's errand, and handing that authority to governments would lead to longer data retention terms and less privacy as the interests of law enforcement (more trumped up than genuine) would prevail.

By: Ryan Radia

Ryan Radia — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:01:04 +0000

I don't really know if IP addresses are all that useful. But Google maintains records of IP addresses and search queries for 18 months, even though the practice is getting more and more controversial. You have to assume there's at least some pretty good reasoning behind for Google's data retention policy.
Not that I'm for IP logging, though, even if it means better search results. Consumers demand privacy and the market is providing it, which is exactly what we should expect from competitive discipline.

By: Jim Harper

Jim Harper — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:52:11 +0000

I agree that this is a good example of the market providing privacy (or at least seeking to) consistent with consumer demand (which, of course, is distinct from consumer-advocate demand).

As a consumer myself, I don't assume that there's a good reason for Google's data retention policy. Most IT systems collect information by default, without regard to need and without balancing privacy considerations, so I assume that Google fell into the habit of long data-retention terms and that they may not have a fully justifiable reason for doing so, all things considered.

Trying to dictate data retention terms from the outside (i.e. through regulation) would be a fool's errand, and handing that authority to governments would lead to longer data retention terms and less privacy as the interests of law enforcement (more trumped up than genuine) would prevail.

By: Ryan Radia

Ryan Radia — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 16:01:04 +0000

I don’t really know if IP addresses are all that useful. But Google maintains records of IP addresses and search queries for 18 months, even though the practice is getting more and more controversial. You have to assume there’s at least some pretty good reasoning behind for Google’s data retention policy. Not that I’m for IP logging, though, even if it means better search results. Consumers demand privacy and the market is providing it, which is exactly what we should expect from competitive discipline.

By: Jim Harper

Jim Harper — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:35:27 +0000

How would logging IP addresses improve their search results? Google policy people here in D.C. – true, they may not be the most knowledgeable about the guts of Google’s search and advertising algorithms – say that there’s nothing better than a person’s current search for determining ad relevance. “Psychographic profiling” – or whatever you might want to call it – isn’t that important.

By: Ryan Radia

Ryan Radia — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:32:01 +0000

Well, maybe they should start logging IP addresses–doing so has worked out pretty nicely for Google, and considering how terrible Cuil’s search results are, they need all the help they can get.

By: Jim Harper

Jim Harper — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:35:27 +0000

By: Ryan Radia

Ryan Radia — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:32:01 +0000

Well, maybe they should start logging IP addresses–doing so has worked out pretty nicely for Google, and considering how terrible Cuil’s search results are, they need all the help they can get.

By: Dan Lockton

Dan Lockton — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 09:50:00 +0000

Is this because of ethics, or a structural decision to limit their possible potential liability and the hassle involved? Either way, it's interesting.

By: Dan Lockton

Dan Lockton — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:50:00 +0000

Is this because of ethics, or a structural decision to limit their possible potential liability and the hassle involved? Either way, it's interesting.