Susan Wojcicki Quotes

Android is a major step towards an ethical, user-controlled, free-software portable phone, but there is a long way to go.

I like to keep certain stuff to myself just because I feel like technology is taking over people's lives.

As much as we can, we want to prevent people from having to think about how to keep and share their stuff.

And the user may have a higher comfort level deciding what information to provide rather than worrying about what inferences might be made from what they've gathered.

I think that we have to have the ability to decide what we share and what we don't.

When I know the data that's being shared and I'm asked explicitly for my consent, I want some sites to understand my habits. It helps them suggest books for me to read or movies for my family to watch or friends for us to connect with.

We are living in a world where everything is based on security.

The great advance of personal computers was not the computing power per se but the fact that it brought it right to your face, that you had control over it, that were confronted with it and could steer it.

Folks have to pin me down because, for one thing, I don't have a laptop. I don't have an iPhone, and I refuse to carry them because they're immensely hackable.

Google, Facebook, and other consumer web companies violate our privacy. But that's only because they have an ad-based business model. They can only make money by selling your data - and degrading the product experience with ads.

We don't want to connect you with just anyone on Path. Without the contact list information, some of these features just don't work.

I don't want to kill windowing; I want to restore choice and options.

We all need to decide what makes it safe and secure on the Internet. It can't be anybody else's decision. We have to have a voice.

We are all victims of data mining…. We are in a data mining culture…. Americans do not place a high value on the privacy of their communications and will give up that right for modest benefit.

There are two kinds of cryptography in this world: cryptography that will stop your kid sister from reading your files, and cryptography that will stop major governments from reading your files.

You can have Google or you can have privacy but you can’t have both.

It’s important to recognize that you can’t have 100 percent security and also then have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience.

This is not a case about one isolated iPhone. Rather, this case is about the Department of Justice and the FBI seeking through the courts a dangerous power that Congress and the American people have withheld: the ability to force companies like Apple to undermine the basic security and privacy interests of hundreds of millions of individuals around the globe. The government demands that Apple create a back door to defeat the encryption on the iPhone, making its user’s most confidential and personal information vulnerable to hackers, identify thieves, hostile foreign agents, and unwarranted government surveillance.

My life isn't interesting enough for anyone to hack my phone.

Most people want the convenience of the Internet far more than they want the private spaces that older forms of communication protected.

User-controlled default encryption is a real challenge for law enforcement.

A smart phone essentially creates a dossier of your travels, and consumers have no control over who will eventually see that information.

Unless you are cool with all of your photos and messages becoming public one day, you should delete WhatsApp from your phone.

We recognize that your emotional information is extremely personal. And so we have veered away from all use cases where that data is being collected without your consent.

The No. 1 reason for me to support and help launch Telegram was to build a means of communication that can't be accessed by the Russian security agencies, so I can talk about it for hours.