Comments on: Gmail and its discontents

CNET News.com's Declan McCullagh says the reaction to Google's new e-mail services highlights a tactical divide within the ranks of Internet activists on how best to respond.

[BSRadar]

Dont like it? Dont use it!

If people willingly join Gmail knowing of how it works, where's the beef? I am a responsible individual. I know how to preserve my privacy. I dont need someone else telling me whats fair and whats not...just like you dont need someone telling you whether or not you should have spam or not, or smoke a cigarete or not...it seems like today that many people are moved by the majority/status quo (funded by corp/gov), rather than being an individual making individual decisions for individual wants. IF you dont like it, dont freekin use it!

I agree with you there

I agree with you there. If you don't want computers reading your email, don't use Gmail. I'm sure they don't save personal information from the emails. In fact, from what I have read, it only generates an ad when you open the message. If you don't even open the email, the system won't scan the message. The one thing that does worry me a bit is the fact that Google will keep the messages on their servers after you delete it. I probabally won't be deleting any emails with 1000 megs of storage.

[BSRadar]

Dont like it? Dont use it!

If people willingly join Gmail knowing of how it works, where's the beef? I am a responsible individual. I know how to preserve my privacy. I dont need someone else telling me whats fair and whats not...just like you dont need someone telling you whether or not you should have spam or not, or smoke a cigarete or not...it seems like today that many people are moved by the majority/status quo (funded by corp/gov), rather than being an individual making individual decisions for individual wants. IF you dont like it, dont freekin use it!

I agree with you there

I agree with you there. If you don't want computers reading your email, don't use Gmail. I'm sure they don't save personal information from the emails. In fact, from what I have read, it only generates an ad when you open the message. If you don't even open the email, the system won't scan the message. The one thing that does worry me a bit is the fact that Google will keep the messages on their servers after you delete it. I probabally won't be deleting any emails with 1000 megs of storage.

[Earl Benser]

You're Warned ....

Google is open about the email service's ad content. I think it's
rather stupid to bother with Google's email when any interenet
access service also provides ad-free email. What is it that Google
thinks they are providing that' snot already there?

Anyhow, I repeat the observation, if you don't like the ads, don't
use Gmail.

Life can be simple at times

[Earl Benser]

You're Warned ....

Google is open about the email service's ad content. I think it's
rather stupid to bother with Google's email when any interenet
access service also provides ad-free email. What is it that Google
thinks they are providing that' snot already there?

Anyhow, I repeat the observation, if you don't like the ads, don't
use Gmail.

Life can be simple at times

Who smokes?

I'm curious to know how many of these people interested in banning technologies like GMail are smokers?

They feel so strongly against technologies invading our privacies (even when elected by the individual) that they want them banned -- what about smoking? It kills thousands of people every year ... why aren't they worried more about getting cigarettes banned? How many people are estimated to be killed by GMail. Without scientific research, I think I can still venture a close estimate.

I'm for having the personal rights of being able to make a judgment call for myself ... if I want to smoke, use GMail, eat potato chips, drink soda, thats my decision. Be honest people -- just tell the public that you think we're too stupid to make a choice for ourselves and you think you're the only enlightened ones who can...

I just don't understand the idea of "privacy rights" being more important then "personal rights". This logic would say that we shouldn't educate people on political elections -- we should just ban the candidate we don't like ... hmmm ... that sounds like a familiar style of government, and its not a democratic republic.

Disappointing ...

Who smokes?

I'm curious to know how many of these people interested in banning technologies like GMail are smokers?

They feel so strongly against technologies invading our privacies (even when elected by the individual) that they want them banned -- what about smoking? It kills thousands of people every year ... why aren't they worried more about getting cigarettes banned? How many people are estimated to be killed by GMail. Without scientific research, I think I can still venture a close estimate.

I'm for having the personal rights of being able to make a judgment call for myself ... if I want to smoke, use GMail, eat potato chips, drink soda, thats my decision. Be honest people -- just tell the public that you think we're too stupid to make a choice for ourselves and you think you're the only enlightened ones who can...

I just don't understand the idea of "privacy rights" being more important then "personal rights". This logic would say that we shouldn't educate people on political elections -- we should just ban the candidate we don't like ... hmmm ... that sounds like a familiar style of government, and its not a democratic republic.

Disappointing ...

[delpane]

I tend to be paranoid, but even I like the idea of Gmail.

Ok, I tend to be a little paranoid. I don't have private
conversations, make calls that have bank or credit card
information, or any other important information from a cell
phone, wireless phone, or in a room with a baby monitor. My
uncle once hooked up some sort of scanner in our backyard and
it was amazing the information you could get. Yet I would use
Gmail.

Why, because I would not ever use it for anything private or that
would have important important information in it. I currently
won't use Yahoo email for private email because I don't trust
their security. 90% of the email I get is completely frivolous. If
google wants to know what movie I just saw or work gossip then
I don't care. The information they get will be personal, but not
private.

When one of my family members insist on mailing out every
digital picture they took on their vacation I will have the space.
When I'm at work instead of needing to explain to someone with
limited tech knowledge how to ftp a file to me I can just have
them email it. No worry about the 10mb limit I have with that
account. When I want security and privacy I'll keep using my
kerberized/encrypted account otherwise I'm going to have fun
with that 1GB.

[delpane]

I tend to be paranoid, but even I like the idea of Gmail.

Ok, I tend to be a little paranoid. I don't have private
conversations, make calls that have bank or credit card
information, or any other important information from a cell
phone, wireless phone, or in a room with a baby monitor. My
uncle once hooked up some sort of scanner in our backyard and
it was amazing the information you could get. Yet I would use
Gmail.

Why, because I would not ever use it for anything private or that
would have important important information in it. I currently
won't use Yahoo email for private email because I don't trust
their security. 90% of the email I get is completely frivolous. If
google wants to know what movie I just saw or work gossip then
I don't care. The information they get will be personal, but not
private.

When one of my family members insist on mailing out every
digital picture they took on their vacation I will have the space.
When I'm at work instead of needing to explain to someone with
limited tech knowledge how to ftp a file to me I can just have
them email it. No worry about the 10mb limit I have with that
account. When I want security and privacy I'll keep using my
kerberized/encrypted account otherwise I'm going to have fun
with that 1GB.

objectivity in journalism

Excellent article, I'm a smoker and I have a gmail account. Just one thing... as a piece of journalism (even in an opinion column) I would expect some degree of objectivity. The declaration of "Protechnology" vs. "Information Fundamentalism" is troubled. Sounds almost like a war I saw on TV not too loing ago. This article should be written to a higher standard than some blog, or even my comment.

What do we call this split in tech ideology? Protechnology vs. Privacy fundamentalism? Can't a privacy fundamentalist also be pro-tecnology? It's more like a business move than a technology move on Google's part. It seems like we need some clearly defined stereotypes here before we begin labeling people. How bout pro-google vs. anti-Microsoft, no wait that's almost everyone. Where do the mac people go? Are they pro-technology? (notice how I said they to "other" and alienate the mac users) Can we just call it the anti-regulate-my-software vs. anti-potential-privacy-invasion (or the pro this and that,but without the manipulative wording) debate so that everyone can be fairly represented without abortion-style wording like protechnology? Were all geeks anyway...

I stopped using hotmail today; Thank you google.

objectivity in journalism

Excellent article, I'm a smoker and I have a gmail account. Just one thing... as a piece of journalism (even in an opinion column) I would expect some degree of objectivity. The declaration of "Protechnology" vs. "Information Fundamentalism" is troubled. Sounds almost like a war I saw on TV not too loing ago. This article should be written to a higher standard than some blog, or even my comment.

What do we call this split in tech ideology? Protechnology vs. Privacy fundamentalism? Can't a privacy fundamentalist also be pro-tecnology? It's more like a business move than a technology move on Google's part. It seems like we need some clearly defined stereotypes here before we begin labeling people. How bout pro-google vs. anti-Microsoft, no wait that's almost everyone. Where do the mac people go? Are they pro-technology? (notice how I said they to "other" and alienate the mac users) Can we just call it the anti-regulate-my-software vs. anti-potential-privacy-invasion (or the pro this and that,but without the manipulative wording) debate so that everyone can be fairly represented without abortion-style wording like protechnology? Were all geeks anyway...

I stopped using hotmail today; Thank you google.