Anybody using gmail as the main email service? Comments?

[Aimlink]

Originally Posted by theog

I'd not be surprised if some "paid" services were not scanning emails either... wait, they do... how else do they combat "spam?" lol

If your mail content is scanned to match it with spam-like attributes, this is good and provides better security.

If they, in like fashion, scan your mail content for words that could be used to better match the ads that would be most appropriate for your free account's web interface, then they're reading and compromising your email security.

I genuinely don't get it.

[theog]

Originally Posted by curtis

If your mail content is scanned to match it with spam-like attributes, this is good and provides better security.

If they, in like fashion, scan your mail content for words that could be used to better match the ads that would be most appropriate for your free account's web interface, then they're reading and compromising your email security.

I genuinely don't get it.

I don't think most people "get it."

The technology used is one and the same... what is the difference? The purpose for the scan? lol

IMO, all of them scan email, but google has figured a way to make use of those scans... at least we all like to think that google is the only one that makes use of those scans..... lol

I often wait for people to call me on the carpet for bringing that up about google and then promoting aol or hotmail.... Heck, or even everyone.net for my business accounts... or ******* for my exchange accounts... who knows how far these scans go.... one thing is for sure, customer data and information is worth money. Data is worth money to ANY business who could profit for that information....

At least google is upfront and has a policy in place to combat misuse of the data.

Oh, did I defend google... I'll attack them next month for scanning emails.... lol

[sflorack]

The vast majority of Google's revenue is in targeted advertising. Afterall, they did purchase Doubleclick. IMO, they've essentially managed to woo people with free offerings and honest (although probably seldom read) privacy policies. IMO, the only difference between Google and regular spyware is that you're actually agreeing to being "spyed on" (your emails/chats/websites etc indexed and archived) for the purposes of trying to sell you things.

My personal choice is to pay $20/year to have no advertisements and no indexing or archiving (aside from my own). That doesn't suggest I'm doing anything illegal -- it only suggests that my own sanity/paranoia is worth $20 to me.

[David]

Originally Posted by sflorack

My personal choice is to pay $20/year to have no advertisements and no indexing or archiving (aside from my own). That doesn't suggest I'm doing anything illegal -- it only suggests that my own sanity/paranoia is worth $20 to me.

It's not paranoia to want privacy, it's a basic right. You trade away your basic rights, when you trade your privacy for a Gmail account.

[Aimlink]

Originally Posted by sflorack

The vast majority of Google's revenue is in targeted advertising. Afterall, they did purchase Doubleclick. IMO, they've essentially managed to woo people with free offerings and honest (although probably seldom read) privacy policies. IMO, the only difference between Google and regular spyware is that you're actually agreeing to being "spyed on" (your emails/chats/websites etc indexed and archived) for the purposes of trying to sell you things.

My personal choice is to pay $20/year to have no advertisements and no indexing or archiving (aside from my own). That doesn't suggest I'm doing anything illegal -- it only suggests that my own sanity/paranoia is worth $20 to me.

Hmmm. So they're spying on you ... how? If that's the case, then FastMail also spys since they also scan your mail for spam pattern identification and also filtering.

Additionally, people are paranoid about a lot of things and choose to do all sorts of things to appease their paranoia. Fine. But it's another thing to legitimize it as if it's justified or reasonable on all counts or any count for that matter.

[Aimlink]

Originally Posted by David

It's not paranoia to want privacy, it's a basic right. You trade away your basic rights, when you trade your privacy for a Gmail account.

The only thing I see being traded over a paid account, is security in the sense that if you take a free account, you join other free riders who will get the support that goes with a free account, i.e., very little. A free user can't be shouting for support when something goes wrong with their account. They have no leverage about the terms etc.

With my Google Apps account, I have a number to call for personalised support if needed.

Google saying that they do nothing with your mail beyond what they say they do, is no different from what FastMail says. Both are disclaimers. You believe them or you don't. Paying a fee to a company doesn't guarantee their honesty or integrity.

[David]

Originally Posted by curtis

Hmmm. So they're spying on you ... how? If that's the case, then FastMail also spys since they also scan your mail for spam pattern identification and also filtering.

Additionally, people are paranoid about a lot of things and choose to do all sorts of things to appease their paranoia. Fine. But it's another thing to legitimize it as if it's justified or reasonable on all counts or any count for that matter.

Privacy is a basic right in many countries curtis. It's not paranoia to insist on the upholding of your rights.

[Aimlink]

Originally Posted by David

Privacy is a basic right in many countries curtis. It's not paranoia to insist on the upholding of your rights.

Don't confuse the issue of right to privacy with claiming that a company is spying. It's a smoke screen.

Of course, you have your right to privacy. No sensible person would disagree with this in principle. However, It's another to claim a company is spying and that you have a right to choose not to be spied on. First, we need to substantiate whether or not there is indeed an ongoing breach of privacy and this is where the paranoia comes in.

I don't know how one's right to privacy ever got into the discussion.

Paranoia is irrational and kicks in only when convenient. It's not convenient to go the whole way and simply not use email. Even though the basis for the Google paranoia would be valid when using any email provider, whether free or paid.

[David]

Originally Posted by curtis

Don't confuse the issue of right to privacy with claiming that a company is spying. It's a smoke screen.

Of course, you have your right to privacy. No sensible person would disagree with this in principle. However, It's another to claim a company is spying and that you have a right to choose not to be spied on. First, we need to substantiate whether or not there is indeed an ongoing breach of privacy and this is where the paranoia comes in.

I don't know how one's right to privacy ever got into the discussion.

Paranoia is irrational and kicks in only when convenient. It's not convenient to go the whole way and simply not use email. Even though the basis for the Google paranoia would be valid when using any email provider, whether free or paid.

The right to privacy is most certainly a legal issue for Gmail. (the link is a pdf file)

Gmail violates the privacy rights of non subscribers as well as those have accounts. I am talking about those who have not consented to have their communications monitored, who may they even be aware that their communications are being analyzed.

As I said before, privacy is a basic human right.

[Aimlink]

Originally Posted by David

The right to privacy is most certainly a legal issue for Gmail. (the link is a pdf file)

Gmail violates the privacy rights of non subscribers as well as those have accounts. I am talking about those who have not consented to have their communications monitored, who may they even be aware that their communications are being analyzed.

As I said before, privacy is a basic human right.

That letter you have given a link to, raises concern about breach of privacy without consent. It doesn't confirm or prove anything. IOW's, it's like you writing your claims here without proof or serious substantiation. These concerns have been aired for a long time and Google has responded. Their adsense technology, how it works, and what it does, is no secret to users. A user can't plead ignorance or willful misleading about this.

[David]

Originally Posted by curtis

That letter you have given a link to, raises concern about breach of privacy without consent. It doesn't confirm or prove anything.

You are correct Curtis. It's just one letter, written by one person, in one state, in one country, and it does raise concerns. You will find hundreds of similar links (if you search) stating similar concerns.

Your position seems to be that all those who are concerned about privacy violations are suffering from paranoia. Do you not think you are possibly being a little naive.

[Aimlink]

Originally Posted by David

You are correct Curtis. It's just one letter, written by one person, in one state, in one country, and it does raise concerns. You will find hundreds of similar links (if you search) stating similar concerns.

Your position seems to be that all those who are concerned about privacy violations are suffering from paranoia. Do you not think you are possibly being a little naive.

No. It's just that it can be very scary and in some situations, actually considered naive to think independently about things. You should conform to the common view.

Additionally, I'm not the one who first coined the term 'paranoia'.

[David]

Originally Posted by curtis

No. It's just that it can be very scary and in some situations, actually considered naive to think independently about things. You should conform to the common view.

Additionally, I'm not the one who first coined the term 'paranoia'.

I was not really thinking of you as being naive (when I last posted) and thought it more likely that you worked for Google Anyway, have a good day, I have some painting to do.

[Aimlink]

Originally Posted by David

I was not really thinking of you as being naive (when I last posted) and thought it more likely that you worked for Google Anyway, have a good day, I have some painting to do.

I definitely do not work for Google.

I wonder if Tim O'Reilly does since he gives his opinion here. The internet is replete with views either way.

[sflorack]

Originally Posted by curtis

Hmmm. So they're spying on you ... how? If that's the case, then FastMail also spys since they also scan your mail for spam pattern identification and also filtering.

FM scans individual emails for filtering purposes. Gmail scans emails/websites for the purpose of harvesting data and developing behavioral patterns to serve relevant advertisements. The more Google knows about you, the more it can charge advertisers.

Google is a $16 billion dollar data collection agency. They offer free email, calendars, health record repositories, maps, desktop searches, browsers and toolbars as their means of mining user data. I don't have a problem with them doing so (as long as they're upfront about it) but am simply amazed that some people continue to be in denial about their intentions.