Well, if you are silly enough to upload your files or are willing to put a mysterious "toolbar" on your machine Google is going to have its way with you.

I suspect there will come a day - about two weeks from now - there people will make money selling devices to keep Google out.

Though, truth to tell, I am not all that worried about Google itself; rather it is the ability of the DOJ or the RCMP or assorted other alphabet agencies to obtain access to the information Google has. Google's evil intent is making money in buckets. The Horsement, CSIS, CRCA, CIA, NSA, IRS and so on are much more of a threat.

Of course, we could use the Stockwell Day, "if you are law abiding you have nothing to worry about" trope and just not give a rat's ass. But, to take a silly example - what if the RIAA managed to get the SCUS to allow it to search your files on Google for songs which you may not have the CD and proof of purchase for?

Although there's a long stretch between adding a custom toolbar to your browser and uploading all of your files to a remote server, I don't like installing / opting into either idea. The toolbar concept is not inherently bad, but I dislike added doodad crap, so I don't use any of 'em. The network drive idad makes sense for some uses - as an 'opt in' where users who need the storage could select a special drive to store things. Personally, I wouldn't touch the 'let me mirror your whole drive' thing, though - I want a local, secure, safe and controlled back up of my data ThankYouVeryMuch!

I think the concern arises not from the storage concept, per se, but from the lack of security apparent in this story. My question would be, is it possible to design a system that will allow me complete security in what I store, and complete confidence that what I remove from it is truly gone.

... And yes, it's the pretty colors and whimsical designs ;-)

Is it opt in or opt out? IF it's opt in what's yer beef? You have to knowingly do this to yourself. Like gmail where they said they would look at your email thru that service, you had to opt in to this.
You get to choose whether or not to have BB over your shoulder.
Ain't life an itch? You actually have to choose between cool stuff that makes you all warm and fuzzy inside or principles. How unfair.
I simply won't opt in. Just like there's lots of email I do that won't put thru gmail or Aol because the recipients don't want much of a paper trail to lead back to them.
Making sure that everyone knows the oppurtunity cost of this is noble Al, but going Chicken Little isn't you.

In privacy law there is not only opting for the disclosure but also for the purpose that someone makes of it. I am also a bit concerned that Picasa, the picture tool, which is excellent, is also talking to the outer world, though I have a firewall in that direction as well. The real issue is the complacency thing, that is it normal for a private entity to prepare to amass data at this scale without payment to those it takes from and without a clear statement as to why and what for.

You're gonna have to shift gears a little Mr. McLeod. I'm not a lawyer. I'm not sure I get where you're wanting to lead.
Disclosure---need some help. If they warn you, and if the gmail thing is an indication of how much they tell you(not really small print or hiding it, what's the deal? I don't get it. You're making an argument on grounds I haven't even seen apparently. A map, please.
"The real issue is the complacency thing, that is it normal for a private entity to prepare to amass data at this scale without payment to those it takes from and without a clear statement as to why and what for."
I see these as two seperate issues.
Yes, people are silly rabbits. They'll just go along willy nilly until the FBI or an RIAA rep shows up at their door. Willful ignorance. Problem. Definitely.
But the amassing of datawithout recompense? I don't follow on this one. Again, I need a map to see how you got here, Barrister.

NOw, let me try something else out. My 73 year old mother. She has finally begun to venture out into the digital. This service by Google would be great for her. She doesn't have the slightest idea what it means to have a mirror of her HD. Even if I explained it to her I don't think she could do it. She's so green, and likely will remain so, that she'll likely get infected more than once. This is perfect for her. Maybe there isn't necessarily a nefarious purpose here? I know lots of 20 somethings that would benefit from this as well, even though they use 'puters all the live long day.

So I dunno. Help me over the hills here and I might see more clearly what your complaint is, and I might even change sides. Don't know. I can see both sides right now and am a little partial to the 'well, you did it to yourself dummy' angle right now.

Oh, just occured to me----could this be a potential, inevitable backlash from the whole sharware/no IP craze? I don't know. I'm just asking a question.

First, I presume there is a business model behind this and not altruism. So, that is a purpose. But it is not disclosed to its full extent as is logical in a business model. Yet it relies on personal information, which is the stuff in your files. It is likely a commercial activity with personal information without likely full disclosure of purpose. If so, it is likely bumping hard into Canadian Federal privacy law.<p>And the reason you have these sorts of laws is that people - not rabbits - cannot comprehend the extent to which this information is milled by others for purposes. Data mining is not the pal of the autonomous individual.

"It is likely a commercial activity with personal information without likely full disclosure of purpose."
But is that any worse than say, the grocery stores, selling your buying habits to others in exchange for deals on their wares? THat's legal, right? It squares with Canadian law? Pretty sure it does down here.