Which part is unacceptable - the fobbing off part, or the some data gets sent to a country that tortures people, spies on all its citizens indiscriminately and has not signed up to common international treaties.
I think that before Snowden most people, myself included, would have thought not using google analytics for the above reasons was paranoia.
Now, I think that all digital data should be treated as public and until we change the law to have a public / private demarcation, we need to accept it and deal.
(I see this as a pollution issue, until we get a clean air act, everyone will walk around with cloths across their mouths)
edit: little less troll like:
We have no framework for digital privacy, and until we see an emergent consensus there will not be one.
Here, on this site, we have informed, reasonable people disagree on fundamental definitions of online privacy.
So the first step here is to ask, "privacy in the US is based on two things, actions in ones own home are protected by default, and written communications between yourself and others are protected, and publishing is an explicit act"
What do those things now mean in a world of mobile phones, internet and metadata?
Pretending it's a non-issue and not addressing concerns AND then using an overseas helpdesk service, such that now not only are analytics being sent to the US, but actual communication between a UK citizen and the UK government.
But particularly the latter half.
>> I think that before Snowden most people, myself included, would have thought not using google analytics for the above reasons was paranoia.
Most people haven't been paying much attention then.
>>Now, I think that all digital data should be treated as public and until we change the law to have a public / private demarcation, we need to accept it and deal.
Cool, if that's your attitude to this. Some of us would prefer to prevent our government being complicit wherever possible. They may already be in breech of various regulations and I do intend to be in contact with the ICO soon.
This just sounds like a paranoid rant. If you have a problem with it, either don't visit the site or block the analytics. The reason they are using it is pretty obvious, like everyone else that builds digital services, they want to look at how it gets used. It is a non issue, that's not pretending, it's just putting on a rational hat and taking off the silly rhetoric of paranoia.
Personally, as someone who left the UK in the 90's for silicon valley, I'm blown away that the UK government has even heard of the internet, let alone built a decent digital service.
>> It is a non issue, that's not pretending, it's just putting on a rational hat and taking off the silly rhetoric of paranoia.
I'm glad you're happy to publish all the details of your interactions with government services to an advertising company in another country with far less in the way of data protection law.
I'm saying I'd like to know what sort of privacy analysis was done here, whether it's in compliance with EU and UK privacy and data laws, and whether it's a good idea at all.
Just because I know how to block analytics doesn't mean everyone else has a clue they even exist, nor that we should allow our government to export data about us in this way.
I think that before Snowden most people, myself included, would have thought not using google analytics for the above reasons was paranoia.
Now, I think that all digital data should be treated as public and until we change the law to have a public / private demarcation, we need to accept it and deal.
(I see this as a pollution issue, until we get a clean air act, everyone will walk around with cloths across their mouths)
edit: little less troll like:
We have no framework for digital privacy, and until we see an emergent consensus there will not be one. Here, on this site, we have informed, reasonable people disagree on fundamental definitions of online privacy. So the first step here is to ask, "privacy in the US is based on two things, actions in ones own home are protected by default, and written communications between yourself and others are protected, and publishing is an explicit act"
What do those things now mean in a world of mobile phones, internet and metadata?