• On TV.com: Most Annoying New TV Characters
advertisement
August 4, 2010 3:37 PM PDT

Google's Schmidt: Society not ready for technology

by Ina Fried

TRUCKEE, Calif.--For those concerned with privacy, Google CEO Eric Schmidt gave them a few more things to start worrying about.

At a conference here Wednesday, Schmidt noted that using artificial intelligence, computers can take 14 pictures of anyone on the Internet and stand a good chance of identifying that person. Similarly, the data collected by location-based services can be used not only to show where someone is at, but to also predict with a lot of accuracy where they might be headed next.

"Pretty interesting," Schmidt said. "Good idea, Bad idea?...The technology of course is neutral but society is not fundamentally ready."

His comments came at the start of Techonomy, a new conference devoted to looking at how technology is changing and can change society.

Schmidt said that society really isn't prepared for all of the changes being thrust upon it. "I think it's time for people to get ready for it."

Schmidt said these records are a challenge for everyone, himself included, as he noted he was a child of the 1960s.

"Raise your hand if you were a well-behaved teenager," Schmidt said, drawing few if any hands from the high-powered crowd.

Techonomy, which runs through Friday, is the brainchild of ex-Fortune staffers Brent Schlender, David Kirkpatrick, and Peter Petre. Other speakers include Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates and Sun co-founder Bill Joy.

Schlender said that the conference organizers remain fundamentally optimistic, a point echoed by Petre.

"We invent our way out of problems, even the problems we create," Petre said. "This is the truth we need to show to our children and their children."

Schmidt said he sees a balance eventually coming with society and governments coming to terms on how to regulate the collection of information. The end result, he said, will be that computers will be able to do what they are good at--store and recall information, while humans focus on intuition and problem solving.

"That separation of power is a reasonable one," he said.

On balance, Schmidt said that technology is good, but he said that the only way to manage the challenges is "much greater transparency and no anonymity."

Schmidt said that in an era of asymmetric threats, "true anonymity is too dangerous."

Ina Fried

During her years at CNET News, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft. E-mail Ina.

Recent posts from Beyond Binary
Microsoft's Office event: Think online, not iPad
Student in Jobs spat sours on Apple, not journalism
Windows Phone 7 will sync to Macs
Ballmer on tablets, PCs and more (Q&A;)
Ballmer talks Windows Phone 7 with CNET (Q&A;)
Exclusive: How to copy, paste in Windows Phone 7
How Microsoft plans to sell Windows Phone 7
Windows Phone 7 launch brings slew of phones (live blog)
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (34 Comments)
  • prev
  • next
by fjpoblam August 4, 2010 5:09 PM PDT
Society is not ready for Google's Schmidt. (Or, more accurately, society is ready for the good riddance of the limited mindsets of those like Google's Schmidt. Schmidt, plainly put, has no vision.) Society and human intelligence are capable of overcoming the technological shortcomings that Schmidt "foresees".
Reply to this comment 2 people like this comment
by bplewis24 August 5, 2010 9:12 AM PDT
You need to brush up on your reading comprehension. Brandon
5 people like this comment
by Presedento August 4, 2010 5:29 PM PDT
I think that technology is good, if used wisely. I tend to agree that the society is not ready or does not know how to handle rapidly changing technological environment. One thing I should mention, Google has to be very carful with violation of privacy, otherwise will face the law suits. The way it usually happends, when someone wins a law suit on violation of privacy tracing to Google technology, everyone wil jump on the ban wagon...next thing you know, they are out of business. The CEO has to be very carful on making statements such as "true anonymity is too dangerous."
Reply to this comment
by makardhwaj August 5, 2010 6:04 AM PDT
"... true anonymity is too dangeroud." But he sounds exactly like governments around the world...
2 people like this comment
by stickfu August 5, 2010 7:23 AM PDT
Never forget this, with Google you are NOT a customer, you are the PRODUCT.
by stickfu August 5, 2010 9:11 AM PDT
Never forget this, with Google you are NOT a customer, you are the PRODUCT.
by stickfu August 5, 2010 9:12 AM PDT
Never forget this, with Google you are NOT a customer, you are the PRODUCT.
by zyxxy August 5, 2010 1:23 PM PDT
I was trying to forget it, but you just kept saying it over and over and over....
1 person likes this comment
by stickfu August 5, 2010 2:02 PM PDT
Oops, don`t know how that happened. I deserve it, your post made me laugh cheers
1 person likes this comment
by humanssssss August 4, 2010 5:33 PM PDT
if technology is beneficial and doesn't cost an arm and a leg, society always welcomes it. who was ready for mainframe when everyone was using typewriter? mainframe was too expensive for the average joe, they won't embrace or need to be ready for it. if AI is expensive, what good it is if we can get it to talk to us ... a spouse is probably cheaper. ahaha =P
Reply to this comment
by mbertwave August 4, 2010 5:43 PM PDT
Schmidt is saying that for our own safety that anonymity on the internet of the individual must end. The great benefit for expounding this kind of fear is that corporations will know everything about everybody so they can leverage this information for profit. But it won't be a 2 way street. They'll know everything about us and we'll know next to nothing about who is using this data and for what reason. It is rather creepy really. Unfortunately the average person seems unaware or just doesn't care.
Reply to this comment 5 people like this comment
by stickfu August 5, 2010 7:20 AM PDT
Yeah, but who cleans the Pre-Cogs' pool? http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/26145/
1 person likes this comment
by knowles2 August 5, 2010 10:19 AM PDT
Most likely it do not care. An for the average law abiding, non controversial, just get on with his or her own lives, does it really matter, does it matter whether a camera can identify you in 14 pictures or less or predicts that you have a cup of coffee at the same cafe every morning or that you prefer to go to Mcdonalds instead of Burger King. To most people the answer is probably no, it does not matter, if you happen to get free coupons for Mcdonalds or Starbucks so be it, I am sure the vast majority of people will not mind, in fact given the privacy advocates failed to even make the tiniest of dents into facebook despite the enormast media attention given to there boycott calls tells you that they do not care. People generally do not care about privacy, it probably more to do with genetics more than anything else, we simply did not evolve to care about privacy, you could not live in the stone age if you care about such matters, where we all went to toilet together, shower in river together, how could some obsess with privacy survive in that kind of enviroment.
by stickfu August 5, 2010 12:08 PM PDT
Thats the first stop on the despotism train, "if you have nothing to fear why not let us into your private life" Who watches the watchers?, It`s funny Google`s not a very transparant company when it comes to their operations yet they want "in" into our private lives so desperately.
1 person likes this comment
by knowles2 August 6, 2010 1:29 AM PDT
The thing is everything about is known by everyone, commercial companies, the police an your friends then have you really got anything to fear, we all become watchers on each others with gaining the upper if everything about you is freely available. An yes companies need to be more open to an more honest about what they do with the data but that data becomes a lot less valuable an a lot less open to abuse if everyone got access to it, becomes it essentially becomes worthless.
by rktectRich August 4, 2010 6:44 PM PDT
Does Schmidt really think he is some great philosopher or intellect of our present day? Yes there is more and more data being generated by a variety of technology enabled sources every day. And yes Google has access to ALOT of that data through their mass scale of infrastructure and success over the past decade or so. What is misleading here is that he's saying the data is enabling these scary insights into who people are and to "predict where you are going to go." In other words, if people are providing the content, its okay to find out who they are and what they want! But its NOT. There were lots of people before 2003 with 14 pictures of themselves on the internet. It was simply not possible [for any company like Google] at the time to extrapolate who the person was or to derive any sort of insight from an image on the web. Only recent advances in computing power, the trivialization of storage cost, and new graphical analysis algorithms make this possible today on the scale we are referring to. If it weren't for companies like Google spending incredible amounts of resources and PhD brains to identify who you are and what you want, then they wouldn't have these capabilities today. Schmidt is the CEO of a very powerful beast and this is abuse of position. Google's profits are ~95% ad revenue, and advertising has been targeted, yet anonymous, until recently. Obviously the better the targeting, the more money Google can make. But the day they know your name, behaviors, financial history and preferences will be a scary day on so many levels. Do you really trust a private company with servers scattered around the globe and who's sole objective is to please shareholders? We really need to question his motives when he's referring to advancing humanity - and think if these sacrifices are truly necessary to humans becoming more productive and content. On another note: Google killed Wave today - a productivity, communication and collaboration enabler which could be seen as helping to "solve the world's problems." Guess there's no money in that!
Reply to this comment 2 people like this comment
by knowles2 August 5, 2010 10:21 AM PDT
or they killed wave because they were developing a better product to replace in the long term.
by rktectRich August 5, 2010 2:28 PM PDT
@knowles2: I see you heard Schmidt's speech on why they killed Wave - good to know you believe everything you hear. "How To Make Your Failure Look Like A Success 101"
by knowles2 August 6, 2010 1:40 AM PDT
Actually I do not believe everything I hear, if I did I would of believe that this would become amass adopted communication tool use by the masses. I always maintain that would not happen, check my other Cnet comments if you will on wave. Instead I have always taken the view that Wave was a technology demonstrator for testing out new ideas on communication an a technologies for integrating into google other products in the long term. But by placing Google Wave out there as a seperate product, google also gave it the chance of developing a other independent platform which is could sell as a product to commercial firms an place adverts in. I believe google use Wave on two fronts instead on the one single front of trying to revolutionise communications.
by Spicer1258 August 5, 2010 9:00 AM PDT
Silly Humans. All this whining from a pack of Trolls who can't keep themselves from texting while driving?!! Is there any doubt your society lacks the maturity to deal with changing technology? All of this is all obvious and true. Anonymity has been dead for some time. If you believe otherwise, you're delusional. It's precisely these sorts of denials that provent society from evolving.
Reply to this comment
by stickfu August 5, 2010 9:16 AM PDT
Well said citizen 10904834874387A79876837456H4! Your new masters approve. Who needs all that pesky freedom anyway? Time for your Soma.
by knowles2 August 5, 2010 10:25 AM PDT
Who said privacy allows freedom. It never did an never will, you can be the most private individual in the world, it still does not make you free, Why cannot we have it all, no privacy, share everything in the open an still stay an do as you will. In fact you more likely to gain even more freedom this way because no one will have a axe to hold over you if you make a wrong move, it all in the public, everybody knows everything already. Really does eleminate bribery an ransom.
by stickfu August 5, 2010 12:14 PM PDT
Hmmmm.. I do remember hearing something in history about people waging wars and revolutions for their freedoms somewhere, I think a couple died too. Nahh, got to have been a rumor. More Soma!
by stickfu August 5, 2010 12:44 PM PDT
knowles2.. You`d bring a tear to good old Joe Stalin`s eye. If you ever have the opportunity, ask anyone who lived under his tender love and care what life was like. They will in no short order tell you what freedom (and privacy) means to them. If you`d still like a taste of the shangri la you describe you can always cross the Yellow River into the DPRK and enjoy life there.
1 person likes this comment
by knowles2 August 6, 2010 2:06 AM PDT
where they have privacy they think what they want, an generally as long as you stay private an keep you thoughts to your self or to a small group of friends who thing the way you do, you do not get into trouble, in fact the Communists created an embedded the kind privacy many people some people want to promote, where profile it tightly lock down, an bolted shut, an you only communicate between the people you know, just like what people did in communist russia or in North Korea because if they do not they die. People are trying to create that mind set on Facebook, but instead of murderous dictator its Mark Zuckerberg evil corperate guy or evil criminals. True freedom is being able to change the world, get your message out there not just in a close group of friends but to general public that not going to have if your facebook profile is in full lock down mode where only your name an date of birth reveal who you are, The kind of privacy being promoted by some will create the next North Korea or Soviet union as these are the countries which fought again openist, freedom to be heard, and to say what you want to has many people that will listen, read your profile learn about who you are, an to let people hear you say those things, if everyone speak an shouting about there believes on the internet, with everyone knowing everything about everyone you cannot create a other society like the Soviet union or Nazi Germany because that kind of country can only be built in secrete, slow glacial build where crimes an actions slowly get worst over time because no talking to anyone, everyone sticking to the same small group of friends. .
by Captain Bebops August 5, 2010 9:12 AM PDT
Schmidt makes a lot of dorky comments. Perhaps it's time for Google shareholder to rise up and dump him. I think he would have been happier in another country if he were born 50 years earlier.
Reply to this comment 2 people like this comment
by knowles2 August 5, 2010 10:26 AM PDT
How is his comment dorky. he was stating the capabilities of today technolgies an how we are moving to one new technology to the next at lightening speed.
by knowles2 August 5, 2010 10:06 AM PDT
while humans focus on intuition and problem solving. An when the computer do that better than use humans do, then what will us humans get up to then, I wonder.
Reply to this comment
by Stefaninafla August 5, 2010 12:39 PM PDT
Society has never been ready for the rapid changes forced upon it... reading the journals of long dead people that have been published is quite an eye opener...
Reply to this comment 2 people like this comment
by ralfthedog August 5, 2010 1:46 PM PDT
That is a good thing. Those who are ready for change when society is not become wealthy. Those who are not become slaves.
Reply to this comment
by chrisw63 August 6, 2010 7:12 AM PDT
Sorry, but Mr. Schmidt's comments are misdirected. Society is ready. Society knows what to do with this technology. However, it will be individuals or small groups with $'s in their eyes and huge bank accounts that will determine what use this technology is put. Much to Society's dismay and regret.
Reply to this comment 1 person likes this comment
by smackey01 August 6, 2010 7:41 AM PDT
Society is not ready for technology? What about the Iphone or Ipod? It's akin to when success and preparedness meet- the timing needs to be right. Schmidt was referring to Google's Wave, and seeing as that few articles could provide a concise picture of what how it worked or why we needed it, I think he's correct. Google's Wave was too much for us. But obviously society craves new conveniences and bright, shiny new gadgets to play with while we're driving on the express way. And while Google Wave looked cool and might be a neat toy, it seemed to offer too many options for its own good and was too confusing. Having too many choices for TV Channels, flavors of coffee or Pizza joints, makes us all the more discerning until we feel so overwhelmed or pressured (to make the best choice) that we cannot make a decision.
Reply to this comment
by kirkdabears August 6, 2010 7:59 PM PDT
They just want our info so they can use it against us, and if you think any differently your an Idiot.
Reply to this comment
by russkeller August 6, 2010 9:44 PM PDT
Pardon me for stating the obvious but CNET pointed this out years ago and Schmidt is the guy who kicked CNET out of Google press conferences for pointing out all of his personal information that's available through Google.
Reply to this comment
(34 Comments)
  • prev
  • next
advertisement
CNET River

Google TV: What you need to know

faq CNET answers some of the top questions about Google TV, the search engine giant's new software platform for home entertainment gear.
• Sony LCDs gain Google TV

Mr. Tweet goes to Washington

With demon sheep and witchcraft confessions, election campaigns are speaking the language of YouTube and Twitter, and hoping to go viral. Win or lose, it can put a politician on the map.

About Beyond Binary

During her years at CNET, Ina Fried has changed beats several times, changed genders once, and covered both of the Pirates of Silicon Valley. These days, most of her attention is focused on Microsoft.

Beyond Binary is a look at how technology is changing our lives and the people behind all that life-changing stuff, with an extra emphasis on that which emanates from Redmond, Wash.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Beyond Binary topics

Binary Bits

advertisement
Click Here

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right