Today Google launched a new privacy policy that allows the service to share your data with other platforms such as YouTube, Gmail and Blogger. Technology correspondent Mark Gregory discusses how these changes will affect you and your options for data sharing.

This morning the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks began publishing more than 5 million emails from a Texas-based global security analysis company that has been compared to a shadow CIA. WikiLeaks has not explained how it acquired the documents, which belong to the company Stratfor but it's widely believed that WikiLeaks was given the information by the hacker group Anonymous. Hackers linked to Anonymous claim to have stolen emails from Starfor last year. Noah Shachtman is a contributing editor of Wired Magazine and a Fellow at The Brookings Institution.

Google recently announced a new privacy policy that has users and privacy advocates up in arms. Effective March 1, this new policy will consolidate information from users' various products — from Gmail to YouTube to the Android mobile phone operating system — in order to "better tailor its services" for customers. But the move could potentially violate a users' privacy simply to better target advertising. Estimates say between 50-75 percent of the world's internet users utilize at least one of Google's products.

Starting this fall, law-enforcement agencies across the country will be outfitted with new devices that will make iPhones capable of scanning a person's face and matching it to a database of people with criminal records. The new facial-recognition technology, which is also able to collect fingerprints, has raised concerns with privacy advocates who say police who use the device may be conducting "searches" illegally without warrants. Julia Angwin wrote about the new devices in today's edition of The Wall Street Journal.

Two computer programmers presented findings showing that your iPhone and iPad is recording your locations in a hidden file. Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center explains how the devices track your location and why this is a breach of privacy. The issue, he says, is partially the fact that you are being tracked, but also that the file is being saved. This points to a larger privacy problem whereby users don't have a choice as to whether they can be tracked.

You’re still weighing in on the Wikileaks document dump:

The thing about these leaks is how little important information is here. Embarrassing to us and our allies? Sure. But who doesn't think North Korea acts like a spoiled child? Who isn't aware of how China has little impact on North Korea? If WikiLeaks acts like they're doing investigative journalism, they're wrong.They're just another example of tabloid journalism. (Andy on Facebook)

Many air travelers, both passengers and pilots, have expressed their frustration with the full body scanners and enhanced pat-downs enacted by the Transportation Security Administration earlier this month. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano say our privacy is a small sacrifice for our safety, but many people don't think this is a tradeoff they want to accept.

The Supreme Court begins a new term today, facing a list of cases with several dominant themes: personal privacy, the rights of corporations, and just how far the far-flung boundaries of First Amendment protection extend when offensive speech is involved. The court has three female justices for the first time in its history, although newly-appointed Justice Elena Kagan will need to recuse herself from several cases she had pursued or submitted in her former role as Solicitor General.

Google Ventures and In-Q-Tel, the investment arms of Google and the C.I.A., are both backing a start-up company called Recorded Future that monitors activity and text on the Web in real time and uses the information to spot early trends and events. The company also attempts to take current data and model what's going to happen in the future...

Google is not directly collaborating with the C.I.A., but its actions are likely to cause some unease for those already worried about whether the company can be trusted to protect consumers' privacy.

Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook's CEO, has announced new privacy settings after growing criticism that the social networlk has been insufficiently protective of user's personal informaton. Zuckerberg is a secretive figure who rarely gives interviews, but the BBCs technology correspoondent, Rory Cellen-Jones scored one yesterday and asked him about the privacy issue and some of the things he did in college.

Today, Facebook is announcing a major change to its privacy settings in response to criticism that the site was making personal information too public and the privacy settings to complicated to figure out (Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg apologized for this on Monday). The new changes are expected to make it much easier for a user to adjust the settings. But despite the backlash against the social networking site, its fan base is still growing rapidly. Facebook had more than 500 million registered users last month — up from 400 million in September.

As part of our ongoing experiment in sharing personal information online amid this debate about privacy, we're asking a question: What benefit have you gotten from sharing information?

Facebook executives are preparing for a ‘privacy summit’ to discuss the site’s controversial new default privacy settings (which do little to protect users’ privacy). But in a world of over-sharing online, does privacy even matter anymore? And have our notions of public and private changed so dramatically that we couldn’t reverse things if we wanted to?

Talk to someone sharing their information. Take part in our "TMI" experiment!

Are we sharing too much information on Twitter and Facebook? We're exploring the benefits and the downsides of sharing our personal lives making our private lives public. Help us in an experiment!

Seek out a stranger that you see sharing information on the internet — on Twitter, Facebook, FourSquare — anyone who catches your interest. Don't go stalking though, just reach out and ask them one question for us: What benefit does he or she get from sharing personal information publicly? Tell us what happens and we'll talk about it on the air.

Facebook users have become wary of the privacy settings on the social networking site, and now lawmakers may also be taking a closer look at the company and whether the public has enough protections on the website. Takeaway digital editor, Jim Colgan, explains how users' privacy has become less of a priority on the site since its inception, and what lawmakers can do.

Yesterday, we talked about Google's emerging foreign policy, as it deals with take-down requests from governments around the world. Today, we speak to the executive who is in effect the company's "Secretary of State."

Dooce blogger Heather B. Armstrong earns a living revealing personal details — an act that actually got her fired from her job as a web designer seven years ago. Since then she's made a reputation for brutal (and often hilarious) honesty and openness. Her new book, It Sucked and Then I Cried: How I had a Baby, a Breakdown, and a Much Needed Margarita documents her post-partum depression and self-admission to a mental health facility. Not something many parents would be willing to put in hard copy. But you don’t have to be famous to have your personal details on the internet these days. So how do you shield your children from information you don't think they should know? And how much is okay to tell them? Heather B. Armstrong looks at how we decide where to draw the line.

Click through for the transcript

How much do you tell your children? What did your parents over-share with you? Tell us here.

Facebook, the incredibly popular social network, hit massive protests when they changed their terms of service to indicate that they owned all content posted on their site by users. This would include photographs, poems, and messages. Tens of thousands of the social network's users joined online protest groups to denounce the change in policy. While initially trying to defend the change, Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, ended up announcing a return to its previous terms of service. For an overview of the problem we are joined by Slate legal correspondent Dahlia Lithwick and University of Virginia media professor Siva Vaidhynathan.