[simonw]

Running a DNS service doesn't give you the ability to see which pages someone visited when they navigated a website - just that they resolved that website's host name for some reason.

[gaius]

Many individual things Google does aren't too bad by themselves; the problem is that they are all integrated.

[smokeyj]

Google isn't misrepresenting what a DNS service does. Zuck is kind of a slimy weasel.

[gaius]

I don't think most users fully appreciate that it exists purely to log your activity on sites that Google doesn't directly track through ads

[TheSpiceIsLife]

I'm just a welder, but...

DNS can't log your activity on a website, can it? All DNS does is resolve hosts, right?

DNS service can log that you resolved a host, but doesn't know what you did with the IP address it returned.

[gaius]

It can log that you went somewhere that Google could not otherwise track you. And not just websites; mail, SSH, anything else. I'll wager a fair few people's attempts to avoid tracking for certain activities, clearing cookies, private mode, whatever, has been thwarted because they forgot they'd set this up.

[TheSpiceIsLife]

I just want to clear here: a DNS server can't track that you visited a site, only that you request a specific record for a host name.

Is that technically correct?

It stands to reason the average internet user probably then made a visited that IP.

[bllguo]

That's a big distinction though. I don't think Google has the obligation to make sure users are educated and informed. The deceptive practice of Facebook with Onavo is what people object to.

[ballenf]

True this. I think it was on Ars Technica that I was downvoted to oblivion for raising the privacy implications of Google's DNS service.

There is a huge segment of the semi-tech literate crowd that feel wise for using it. I think it's because it's the only time they get to type in an IP address and it makes them feel l33t.