Let the Record show that Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> on or about Sat,
9 Jul 2022 09:32:39 +0200 did write, type or otherwise cause to appear
in talk.politics.guns the following:
>Am Freitag, 08. Juli 2022, um 23:55:00 Uhr schrieb Gronk:
>
>> What would Google have to fear? It's women who have to fear
>> republicans.
>
>Why should Google care about that?
>They already collect very much data about everybody who uses their
>service, they track movement data, health data etc., why should they
>make an exception here?

Politics.

Google is evil, it is woke, and the only question remaining is: is
Google a subsidiary of the DNC, or vice versa? And have the proper
fillings been made with the respective "oversight" organizations?
--
pyotr filipivich
"The Democrats smell blood and don't want to be told that it's their own."
- Mark Steyn

However, we will continue to enable homosexuals to stalk / track your male
children and kidnap them for rape.

Google said late Friday that it will work to quickly delete location
history for people going to abortion sites and other medical sites
following the Supreme Court�s overturning of Roe v. Wade last week.

�Today, we�re announcing that if our systems identify that someone has
visited one of these places, we will delete these entries from Location
History soon after they visit,� wrote Jen Fitzpatrick, Google�s senior
vice president of core systems and experiences, in a blog post.

Fitzpatrick noted that visits to places like counseling centers, domestic
violence shelters, abortion clinics and fertility centers �can be
particularly personal.� Google parent Alphabet owns highly popular devices
and data services, including Android, Fitbit, Search and Google Maps.
That�s become a greater concern since the Supreme Court ruling, because of
uncertainty surrounding whether sensitive data could be used to target
what is now potentially criminal activity.

Google�s post says, �Fitbit users who have chosen to track their menstrual
cycles in the app can currently delete menstruation logs one at a time,
and we will be rolling out updates that let users delete multiple logs at
once.�

The decision from the nation�s highest court overturned nearly 50 years of
legal precedent by reversing its original opinion that women have a
constitutional right to an abortion. For weeks, Google and other tech
companies have avoided answering questions from the media and legislators
about their data storage and practices as well as how they will comply
with potential law enforcement requests.

Google, which sent an email to employees with resources for its own
employees amid the ruling, has also faced questions about its search
results in addition to data privacy.

Even before the decision became official, lawmakers called on Google and
the Federal Trade Commission to ensure data for online consumers seeking
care would be protected in the event that the landmark ruling was
overturned.

In May, a group of 42 Democratic lawmakers urged Google CEO Sundar Pichai
in a letter to stop collecting and keeping unnecessary or non-aggregated
location data that could be used to identify people seeking abortions.

Google�s Friday post didn�t say how it would respond to potential requests
from law enforcement. Instead, the company said it would �continue to
oppose demands that are overly broad or otherwise legally objectionable.�

Google also said the the responsibility is shared by many institutions.

�Given that these issues apply to healthcare providers, telecommunications
companies, banks, tech platforms, and many more, we know privacy
protections cannot be solely up to individual companies or states acting
individually,� the post said.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/01/google-will-delete-location-history-for-
visits-to-abortion-clinics.html

Am Sonntag, 03. Juli 2022, um 02:48:25 Uhr schrieb But fuck the rest of
you:

> Google said late Friday that it will work to quickly delete location
> history for people going to abortion sites and other medical sites
> following the Supreme Court_s overturning of Roe v. Wade last week.

Google users should think about this. I don't want to be spied out by
Google, so I don't own an Android smartphone that can be used to spy me
out.
Much more interesting for me is the fact that Google seems to fear
something. If not, they wouldn't delete that data.

On Sun, 3 Jul 2022 09:37:43 +0200, Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:

>Am Sonntag, 03. Juli 2022, um 02:48:25 Uhr schrieb But fuck the rest of
>you:
>
>> Google said late Friday that it will work to quickly delete location
>> history for people going to abortion sites and other medical sites
>> following the Supreme Court_s overturning of Roe v. Wade last week.
>
>Google users should think about this. I don't want to be spied out by
>Google, so I don't own an Android smartphone that can be used to spy me
>out.
>Much more interesting for me is the fact that Google seems to fear
>something. If not, they wouldn't delete that data.

You think Apple doesn't record and sell their user's location data?

Swill
--

Republican congressman Andrew Clyde (GA):
"You know, if you didn't know the tv footage was video from
January 6, you'd actually think it was a normal tourist visit."

Am Sonntag, 03. Juli 2022, um 15:15:08 Uhr schrieb
governor.swill@gmail.com:

> You think Apple doesn't record and sell their user's location data?

I assume that Apple also collects data, therefore I also don't have
any Apple products. I don't have a mobile phone at all.

Marco Moock wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 03. Juli 2022, um 02:48:25 Uhr schrieb But fuck the rest of
> you:
>
>> Google said late Friday that it will work to quickly delete location
>> history for people going to abortion sites and other medical sites
>> following the Supreme Court_s overturning of Roe v. Wade last week.
>
> Google users should think about this. I don't want to be spied out by
> Google, so I don't own an Android smartphone that can be used to spy me
> out.
> Much more interesting for me is the fact that Google seems to fear
> something. If not, they wouldn't delete that data.
>

What would Google have to fear? It's women who have to fear republicans.

In article <tab57i$vhgi$3@dont-email.me>,
Gronk <invalide@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> What would Google have to fear? It's women who have to fear republicans.

Any records google keeps are subject to subpoena. Records they
didn't keep before subpoena are neither subpoenable or a
perversion of justice. They only have to keep such records the
law says they have to keep.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
Discordia: not just a religion but also a parody. This post / \
I am an Andrea Chen sockpuppet. insults Islam. Mohammed

Am Freitag, 08. Juli 2022, um 23:55:00 Uhr schrieb Gronk:

> What would Google have to fear? It's women who have to fear
> republicans.

Why should Google care about that?
They already collect very much data about everybody who uses their
service, they track movement data, health data etc., why should they
make an exception here?

Marco Moock wrote:
> Am Freitag, 08. Juli 2022, um 23:55:00 Uhr schrieb Gronk:
>
>> What would Google have to fear? It's women who have to fear
>> republicans.
>
> Why should Google care about that?

To protect women from republicans.

> They already collect very much data about everybody who uses their
> service, they track movement data, health data etc., why should they
> make an exception here?
>

Am Thu, 14 Jul 2022 21:51:12 -0600
schrieb Gronk <invalide@invalid.invalid>:

> Marco Moock wrote:
> > Am Freitag, 08. Juli 2022, um 23:55:00 Uhr schrieb Gronk:
> >
> >> What would Google have to fear? It's women who have to fear
> >> republicans.
> >
> > Why should Google care about that?
>
> To protect women from republicans.

I don't think that Google give such data to the republican party. Maybe
they fear that their own employees may abuse such data.

In article <20220716095032.6ad63bc1@x40>,
Marco Moock <mo01@posteo.de> wrote:

> I don't think that Google give such data to the republican party. Maybe
> they fear that their own employees may abuse such data.

If they have the records, they can be subpeonaed. If they don't,
and have no record keeping law, what they don't have can't be
subpeonaed. They can fight a subpeona, but the sure way to keep
their records private is to never have them. (Destroying records
to resist a subpeona is obstruction of justice.)

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
Discordia: not just a religion but also a parody. This post / \
I am an Andrea Chen sockpuppet. insults Islam. Mohammed