+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 43 of 43
IT News Thread, Google to create new Chrome OS in Other News; Originally Posted by localzuk Please read up on 'SafeHarbour'. Export.gov - Safe Harbor It means that exported data is covered ...
  1. #31
    mpe
    mpe is online now

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Exeter
    Posts
    1,103
    Thank Post
    106
    Thanked 65 Times in 57 Posts
    Rep Power
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Please read up on 'SafeHarbour'. Export.gov - Safe Harbor

    It means that exported data is covered to the same standards as the EU, otherwise exporting that data would actually not just be an issue, but would be illegal.
    Not only is there no enforcement behind this the whole thing is "self certify" with a modest fee.

  2. #32

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,892
    Thank Post
    518
    Thanked 2,494 Times in 1,935 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by mpe View Post
    Not only is there no enforcement behind this the whole thing is "self certify" with a modest fee.
    Yes, but when they break the rules, and the EU complains at them, do you think they'll do nothing about it?

  3. #33
    somabc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,337
    Thank Post
    83
    Thanked 388 Times in 258 Posts
    Rep Power
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Yes, but when they break the rules, and the EU complains at them, do you think they'll do nothing about it?
    They can give an $11,000 a day fine, which is actually not that much.

    Export.gov - Safe Harbor Enforcement Overview

    Federal and State "Unfair and Deceptive Practices" Authority and Privacy

    This memorandum outlines the authority of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 41-58, as amended) to take action against those who fail to protect the privacy of personal information in accordance with their representations and/or commitments to do so. It also addresses the exceptions to that authority and the ability of other federal and state agencies to take action where the FTC does not have authority.(1)


    FTC Authority over Unfair or Deceptive Practices


    Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act declares "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce" to be illegal. 15 U.S.C. § 45(a)(1). Section 5 confers on the FTC the plenary power to prevent such acts and practices. 15 U.S.C. § 45(a)(2). Accordingly, the FTC may, upon conducting a formal hearing, issue a "cease and desist" order to stop the offending conduct. 15 U.S.C. § 45(b). If it would be in the public interest to do so, the FTC can also seek a temporary restraining order or temporary or permanent injunction in U.S. district court. 15 U.S.C. § 53(b). In cases where there is a widespread pattern of unfair or deceptive acts or practices, or where it has already issued cease and desist orders on the matter, the FTC may promulgate an administrative rule prescribing the acts or practices involved. 15 U.S.C. § 57a.


    Anyone who does not comply with an FTC order is subject to a civil penalty of up to $11,000, with each day of a continuing violation constituting a separate violation.(2) 15 U.S.C. § 45(l). Likewise, anyone who knowingly violates an FTC rule is liable for $11,000 for each violation. 15 U.S.C. § 45(m). Enforcement actions can be brought by either the Department of Justice, or if it declines by the FTC. 15 U.S.C. § 56.


    FTC Authority and Privacy


    In exercising its Section 5 authority, the FTC takes the position that misrepresenting why information is being collected from consumers or how the information will be used constitutes a deceptive practice.(3) For example, in 1998, the FTC filed a complaint against GeoCities for disclosing information it had collected on its Web site to third parties for purposes of solicitation, and without prior permission, despite its representations to the contrary.(4) The FTC staff has also asserted that the collection of personal information from children, and sale and disclosure of that information, without the parents' consent is likely to be an unfair practice.(5)


    In a letter to Director General John Mogg of the European Commission, FTC Chairman Pitofsky noted the limitations on the FTC's authority to protect privacy where there has not been a misrepresentation (or no representation at all) as to how the information collected will be used. FTC Chairman Pitofsky letter to John Mogg (September 23, 1998). However, companies that want to avail themselves of the proposed "safe harbor" will have to certify that they will protect the information they collect in accordance with prescribed guidelines. Consequently, where a company certifies that it will safeguard the privacy of information and then fails to do so, such action would be a misrepresentation and a "deceptive practice" within the meaning of Section 5.



    As the FTC's jurisdiction extends to unfair or deceptive acts or practices "in or affecting commerce," the FTC will not have jurisdiction over the collection and use of personal information for noncommercial purposes, charitable fund-raising for example. See Pitofsky letter, p. 3. However, the use of personal information in any commercial transaction will satisfy this jurisdictional predicate. Thus, for example, the sale by an employer of personal information on its employees to a direct marketer would bring the transaction within the purview of Section 5.
    Export.gov - Safe Harbor US Letter on Privacy and FAQs
    Last edited by somabc; 9th July 2009 at 11:13 AM.

  4. #34
    enjay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    4,488
    Thank Post
    282
    Thanked 196 Times in 167 Posts
    Rep Power
    76
    If each day of a continuing violation is a new violation (the second bold bit in your quote), surely that means that fines would stack up very quickly into a real number, even to someone with Google's bank balance.

    Day 1 = $11000
    Day 2 = $33000 (day 1's $11k, day 2's $11k plus $11k for a new violation)
    Day 3 = $66000 (day 2's $33k, plus $22k for another day plus a new violation)
    and so on.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,168
    Thank Post
    98
    Thanked 319 Times in 261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by NickJones View Post
    If each day of a continuing violation is a new violation (the second bold bit in your quote), surely that means that fines would stack up very quickly into a real number, even to someone with Google's bank balance.

    Day 1 = $11000
    Day 2 = $33000 (day 1's $11k, day 2's $11k plus $11k for a new violation)
    Day 3 = $66000 (day 2's $33k, plus $22k for another day plus a new violation)
    and so on.
    Not quite, it looks like the maximum fine is $11000 per violation, so each day would increase the total by only $11000.

    Of course they do mention that each breach of any individual rule is a separate violation, so the fine could work out being several times $11000 each day.

  6. #36

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,892
    Thank Post
    518
    Thanked 2,494 Times in 1,935 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    839
    Quote Originally Posted by jamesb View Post
    Not quite, it looks like the maximum fine is $11000 per violation, so each day would increase the total by only $11000.

    Of course they do mention that each breach of any individual rule is a separate violation, so the fine could work out being several times $11000 each day.
    Exactly. So, if they breach that rule with 1000 people's identities, does that not mean they have a $1.1m a day fine?

  7. #37


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,032 Times in 812 Posts
    Rep Power
    339
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Exactly. So, if they breach that rule with 1000 people's identities, does that not mean they have a $1.1m a day fine?
    As well as being sued for breach of contract, investigated for corporate espionage and the resulting loss of business from that press.....

  8. #38
    enjay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Reading, Berkshire, UK
    Posts
    4,488
    Thank Post
    282
    Thanked 196 Times in 167 Posts
    Rep Power
    76
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Exactly. So, if they breach that rule with 1000 people's identities, does that not mean they have a $1.1m a day fine?
    No, worse than that. Day 1 would incur a fine of $1.1m, but day 2 would bring another 1000 violations, meaning that the day 2 fine would be $2.2m, plus the $1.1m they still owe from day 1. Day 3 would have a total of 3000 violations (or possibly 4000?!) at $11k each, plus the previous fines (and interest?!).

  9. #39

    sparkeh's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    6,815
    Thank Post
    1,298
    Thanked 1,663 Times in 1,115 Posts
    Blog Entries
    22
    Rep Power
    508
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    I read that it won't be supporting third party web api's - so no flash, java, silverlight, etc. All apps must be AJAX.
    Google has announced its hardware partners and thats its working with Adobe - so we will probably see flash
    Clicky

  10. #40

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,727
    Thank Post
    859
    Thanked 905 Times in 750 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    330
    Interesting. Certainly would make sense to support flash like technology. Still it at odds with the article over at Anantech, Linky, which suggests

    Developers would be limited to AJAXy technologies, with no Adobe Flash to back them up. For the most part, developers would be looking at abilities below what Flash and Java are capable of, so not everyone would necessarily be happy about working with a limited toolkit.
    Still, it's very very early days without even sign of an Alpha release let alone production betas, etc. Certainly will be interesting over the next few months as more details come to light on what exactly it is Google are planning - and Microsoft response/counter attack.

  11. #41

    matt40k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ipswich
    Posts
    4,434
    Thank Post
    368
    Thanked 646 Times in 528 Posts
    Rep Power
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by Galway View Post
    I read the BBC article.

    Its basically a bootable browser, with all apps running on googles server farms and so requires a internet connection to function.

    Based on those facts, and the obvious nature in which google uses such stored information to push adverts and gain financial reward from the data stored on its servers I think I have made my mind up.

    Questions such as Will sims run on it? Is the data security acceptable etc are a joke.

    Even netbooks have a use off the internet. With no central management I can imagine only a small minority being interested in such a beast. With the various flavours of linux available I think even this minority being well catered for.

    When I saw the headline I was expecting so much more, and image Microsoft laughed their socks off when they heard this ground trembler of a story break.

    BBC NEWS | Business | Charge of Google's light brigade
    Assuming there is an offline mode (ie not connected to Google HQ), you'll be ok.

    SIMS will run as a cloud application, ie SLG2. Or run via Tsweb (over HTTPS)

  12. #42

    Ric_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    7,592
    Thank Post
    109
    Thanked 769 Times in 598 Posts
    Rep Power
    181
    @matt40k: I was thinking just the same thing about running applications... many business have been using Citrix products to run their applications for years. The Java client for XenApp works rather well too.

    As for things like CRMs, there's many that are web-based and the shiny-AJAX in modern collaboration suites make them easily usable through a web browser.

    I don't think that the Google OS will be terrible and there's no way they can tie you in to their services. Treat it like anything else - a tool that will serve the purpose for certain jobs. If it doesn't do what YOU need, don't use it - why does everything need to do everything?

  13. #43

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Surrey
    Posts
    2,168
    Thank Post
    98
    Thanked 319 Times in 261 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by Ric_ View Post
    I don't think that the Google OS will be terrible and there's no way they can tie you in to their services. Treat it like anything else - a tool that will serve the purpose for certain jobs. If it doesn't do what YOU need, don't use it - why does everything need to do everything?
    I'm not concerned about it doing everything, I'm concerned about Google's lack of any respect for user's privacy.

    I'm also concerned that they appear to be delusional - talking about creating an OS which won't need any anti-virus or even carry any security risks - Google Oompa-Loompas dream of virus-free OS ? The Register.

    They succeeded so well in making Chrome secure after all (ignoring the security vulnerabilities in it, and its tracking back information straight to Google HQ).

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. How can i create a border?
    By craigg in forum EduGeek Joomla 1.5 Package
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 21st August 2009, 10:38 PM
  2. Create a Regfrag
    By mrwobbly in forum Windows
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 15th March 2009, 08:24 PM
  3. Create PDF
    By thom in forum Educational Software
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 19th September 2006, 10:14 AM
  4. Cant create Mandatory profiles
    By spike in forum Windows
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 4th April 2006, 10:42 AM
  5. create your own it song
    By russdev in forum Other Stuff
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 23rd November 2005, 04:57 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •