Hey man.. take it up with Bruce. It's a quote from his article.
I'm taking it up with you because you quoted Bruce (hypocritically) out of context in a failed attempt to support your Eric Schmidt turd polishing.
Did you read it?
Yes, I did, and did you comprehend it?
He said much more than your quote that puts the ball deep into Google's court, not just the government.
Here's some parts you may have missed:
''Google could change that. It could encrypt your e-mail so only you could decrypt and read it. It could provide for secure voice and video so no one outside the conversations could eavesdrop. It doesn't."
''their assurances deliberately ignores the massive security vulnerability built into its services by design"
''The main focus of massive Internet companies and government agencies both still largely align: to keep us all under constant surveillance. When they bicker, it's mostly role-playing designed to keep us blasé about what's really going on."
''they're relying on their users not understanding what real security looks like"
If you still have questions about this, I suggest you bother to read the links/sources I already posted here as well. Do note and please read Schneier in the second link.
Schmidt's comment is saying this: don't type anything that you want to be private into any search engine.
He actually said this:
''If you've got something to hide, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."
Did you not read that part? It's very clear.
He's saying that any time it's someone else's server your setting yourself up to be spied upon, read: anonymise yourself if it's something s00per s33kr1t.
That's not what he said. See above.
He's blaming the government for his own personal failings, which is pathetic. If he truly gave a fuck about the privacy and security of American citizens he would have run Google in a very different manner (which was most of what Bruce said). But, Eric didn't.
What Eric Schmidt is saying is that the public shouldn't expect privacy from Google and if you don't like it, tough shit because you shouldn't be doing anything that requires privacy in the first place on Google (or any other search engine). DuckDuckGo would disagree, thanks.
From that link via DuckDuckGo:
''... we will comply with court ordered legal requests. However, in our case, we don't expect any because there is nothing useful to give them since we don't collect any personal information."
Someone who isn't a pile of shit does the right thing, the ethical thing and protects the privacy, security and rights of those who entrust their personal communications and data to them. Eric chose the wrong path and wants to pass the buck at the feet of government because he also doesn’t believe in personal responsibility (at least when it comes to him, anyway).
Eric wants suckers to believe he has no choice but to make his services insecure and non-private. He wants suckers to believe that all other search engines have no choice either. He is a liar.
Mock and make light of activists and whistleblowers all you want, but many of them risk their fucking ass for your freedoms whether you want to respect that or not.