Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

[Arlen G. Holder]

Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

It's a permanent log of digital and physical things you've bought that
Google's automated scans picked up from receipts sent to your Gmail inbox.

It's apparently located at:
<https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>

And, it's not easy to get rid of the data, at least not en masse.
<https://www.engadget.com/2015/06/01/google-privacy-security-hub/>

Nor could I find _any_ way to turn it off, even after looking here:
<https://myaccount.google.com/data-and-personalization>

Other than inevitable childish jokes about not using Gmail, or silly
suggestions about not having emails with receipts, do you know of any way
to turn this receipt tracking off that I missed?

[The Real Bev]

On 05/17/2019 09:34 PM, Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.
>
> It's a permanent log of digital and physical things you've bought that
> Google's automated scans picked up from receipts sent to your Gmail inbox.
>
> It's apparently located at:
> <https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>

I have none in either account that I use for shopping. Which purchases
are being tracked?

> And, it's not easy to get rid of the data, at least not en masse.
> <https://www.engadget.com/2015/06/01/google-privacy-security-hub/>
>
> Nor could I find _any_ way to turn it off, even after looking here:
> <https://myaccount.google.com/data-and-personalization>
>
> Other than inevitable childish jokes about not using Gmail, or silly
> suggestions about not having emails with receipts, do you know of any way
> to turn this receipt tracking off that I missed?

--
Cheers, Bev
Some people are like Slinkies... Not really good for
anything, but they still bring a smile to your face
when you push them down a flight of stairs.

[John Doe]

Wow. I wonder if that's in the agreement, that they can read my emails
without any justification such as a court order. The fact getting rid of
it is difficult is no surprise. They make it that way, intentionally.
Apparently stealing information has become their forte.

It's not just receipt tracking, it's them reading our emails. That is
what they are doing. If they can do it for that purpose, they can do it
for anything. Maybe I'll move everything to my Hotmail account.

[John Doe]

The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Arlen G. Holder wrote:

>> Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail
>> account.
>>
>> It's a permanent log of digital and physical things you've bought
>> that Google's automated scans picked up from receipts sent to
>> your Gmail inbox.
>>
>> It's apparently located at:
>> <https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>
>
> I have none in either account that I use for shopping.

There are a bunch in mine.

> Which purchases are being tracked?

Looks like Amazon. Could be others. I do lots of online shopping,
but employ no Google services for that. So the poster is obviously
right, they are effectively reading my emails.

Of course their filthy justification for reading our emails is that
they are providing a service, even though it is a duplicative,
unwanted, and mostly hidden service.

[John Doe]

There was a long thread about this nine months ago on Reddit.
I'm surprised it isn't common knowledge.


--

"Arlen G. Holder" <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

[Carlos E.R.]

On 18/05/2019 10.37, John Doe wrote:
> So the poster is obviously
> right, they are effectively reading my emails.

Of course they machine read them. It is in the terms and conditions that
you accepted.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[nospam]

In article <qbofh7$ib4$1...@dont-email.me>, John Doe

<alway...@message.header> wrote:
>
> Wow. I wonder if that's in the agreement, that they can read my emails
> without any justification such as a court order. The fact getting rid of
> it is difficult is no surprise. They make it that way, intentionally.

they can, and do.

> Apparently stealing information has become their forte.

they're not stealing.

you agreed to it by accepting their terms of service.

> It's not just receipt tracking, it's them reading our emails. That is
> what they are doing. If they can do it for that purpose, they can do it
> for anything. Maybe I'll move everything to my Hotmail account.

that isn't any better.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Fri, 17 May 2019 21:48:17 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:

> I have none in either account that I use for shopping.
> Which purchases are being tracked?

Even though I generally buy online only (or mostly) what I can't get in a
brick-and-mortar store where I can inspect what I'm getting, even I. who
make frew online purchases, still have _plenty_ when I looked!
<https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>

The list even includes _free_ stuff - such as this femtocell cellular
repeater attached to my router tjat my cellular carrier gifted me:
<https://i.postimg.cc/zDsZJNwN/purchase02.jpg>

Here's a receipt for BMW factory & dealer diagnostic tools from China,
which, by the way, you can't obtain _except_ online, because this is the
both modified (i.e., hacked) versions of BMW coding software, and the exact
_same_ software that both the factory in Germany and the local dealers use,
including the ability to program the score of ECUs in the bimmer (e.g.,
EDIABAS, INPA, NCSExpert, NCS Dummies, EasyDIS, DIS/GT1 & Progman):
<https://i.postimg.cc/KvGVcYKd/purchase03.jpg>

Outside of stuff you can only get on the Internet, here's a receipt for an
Amazon gift order from years ago, whom I'm sure many people buy from:
<https://i.postimg.cc/j2DbMQVY/purchase04.jpg>

Here's a receipt for accessories bought from Nordstrom's:
<https://i.postimg.cc/pd2VvjN3/purchase06.jpg>

There's even a receipt containing all my details when I filled out a
tire-warranty registration card online with tire serial numbers:
<https://i.postimg.cc/mDmsBp3H/purchase05.jpg>

Since I do all my own mechanical work, I comprehend tire specs so that I
can purchase, online, the best tires possible, where I then have them ship
those tires to my home so that I can match mount and balance them at my own
convenience in my own garage, knowing the job is done perfectly (you don't
even want to know how many times tire shops cut corners in the interest of
"their" time and expense, when they are mounting & balancing your tires!)
<https://i.postimg.cc/L6b5LpQh/purchase08.jpg>

And, since I do all my own mechanical work, here are brake pads & shoes for
two vehicles shipped directly from the manufacturer's warehouse, where they
give me a discount the engineers like that I ask them about their friction
material specs - where most people are clueless, IMHO, on how to purchase
friction materials, even those as simple as OEM-spec brake pads & shoes:
<https://i.postimg.cc/T1KLM4Lk/purchase07.jpg>

I save tons of money buying some things online, where, for example, I got 6
better-than-OEM quality tires for less than $100 each, match mounted,
balanced, & installed.

BTW, as a public service announcement aside, notice that two cars' worth of
excellent friction materials meeting or exceeding factory OEM spec cold/hot
friction ratings, is, get this, only $100 in total! (How much did your last
brake job cost for 8 wheels?)

People who say "you get what you pay for", are, IMHO clueless idiots who
don't comprehend the spec of what they're purchasing; you get whatever it
is that you get, which you get, obviously, the best based on knowledge of
the right engineering spec, and as close to the manufacturer as you can, so
as to strip out the middlemen who jack up the prices tremendously, IMHO.

If you learn how to comprhend brake friction material specs, and then buy
as close to the chosen manufacturer as possible, and then do you own work,
a full friction material replacement meeting or exceeding factory OEM
specs, is about $50 per vehicle (front & back).[And yes, I wrote the DIY.]

HINT: I recently replaced a neighbor's SUV 5-speed clutch, diaphragm, pilot
bearing, throw-out bearing, rebuilt master & slave cylinder, and flywheel,
for about $250 in parts,. all of which met or exceeded OEM specs where
everything but the flywheel was the OE supplier (and yes, I wrote a DIY for
that too).

Back to the Google tracking of all your purchase receipts in your email,
I don't see any way to turn it off or "Pause" it, in Google parlance:
<https://myaccount.google.com/data-and-personalization>

The _only_ way I know to stop it is to delete your email as shown below
with this Motorola Moto-G bought as a gift phone years ago:
<https://i.postimg.cc/vTXjyRGR/purchase01.jpg>

If I have this much, I can imagine what someone has who buys stuff online
frequently - where - anything online - is just waiting to be hacked.

Given that, I don't see yet how _turning it off_ is possible.
o Do you?

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sat, 18 May 2019 10:21:13 -0000 (UTC), John Doe wrote:

> There was a long thread about this nine months ago on Reddit.
> I'm surprised it isn't common knowledge.

I'm not sure what's common knowledge or not, where what irks me is that I
can't find _any_ way to turn it off in the "typical" place for such things:
<https://myaccount.google.com/data-and-personalization>

The problem is finding a _better_ free mail service than Gmail...
o Does anyone know of what's _better_ than Gmail for free?

If not, short of deleting your email, does anyone know of _any_ practical
way to turn this receipt scanning off & still use Google Gmail servers?

[The Real Bev]

On 05/18/2019 08:42 AM, Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> On Fri, 17 May 2019 21:48:17 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
>
>> I have none in either account that I use for shopping.
>> Which purchases are being tracked?

<snip>

> Back to the Google tracking of all your purchase receipts in your email,
> I don't see any way to turn it off or "Pause" it, in Google parlance:
> <https://myaccount.google.com/data-and-personalization>
>
> The _only_ way I know to stop it is to delete your email as shown below
> with this Motorola Moto-G bought as a gift phone years ago:
> <https://i.postimg.cc/vTXjyRGR/purchase01.jpg>
>
> If I have this much, I can imagine what someone has who buys stuff online
> frequently - where - anything online - is just waiting to be hacked.
>
> Given that, I don't see yet how _turning it off_ is possible.
> o Do you?

Not a clue, but I looked again. My accounts are empty, but hubby's
account has one entry going back over a year ago. He wouldn't have done
anything in his account, which he only accesses using 'nail' (linux
text-only).

I normally do all the on-line shopping, but he must have ordered that
thing while I was gone. I've never done anything to block anything at
the gmail site, I rely on Thunderbird to deal with spam. Unfortunately
every once in a while it decides that real mail from friends and
relatives is spam and puts it in the junk folder. Retraining doesn't
help. This is why I don't delete it automatically.

--
Cheers, Bev
Children, your performance was miserable. Your parents will
all receive phone calls instructing them to love you less.

[Shadow]

Account settings --> junk settings --> Do not mark as junk if
sender is in personal address book
(repeat as necessary for every account you have)

Trumps any other filter.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

[The Real Bev]

I've always had that set. Doesn't seem to work.

--
Cheers, Bev
Warning: Objects in mirror appear smarter than they are.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sat, 18 May 2019 09:16:27 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:

> Not a clue, but I looked again. My accounts are empty, but hubby's
> account has one entry going back over a year ago. He wouldn't have done
> anything in his account, which he only accesses using 'nail' (linux
> text-only).
>
> I normally do all the on-line shopping, but he must have ordered that
> thing while I was gone. I've never done anything to block anything at
> the gmail site, I rely on Thunderbird to deal with spam. Unfortunately
> every once in a while it decides that real mail from friends and
> relatives is spam and puts it in the junk folder. Retraining doesn't
> help. This is why I don't delete it automatically.

Hi The Real Bev,

It's interesting that you found almost literally nothing in your receipt
cache, where I wonder, aloud, if most people have a similar experience?

The questions that we all need to consider how to answer are:
1. What actually does Google consider an "electronic receipt" anyway?
2. How can we permanently turn this scanning off (or pause it)?
<https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>

We go way back where I trust your results, but where mine differ in that I
don't think I do all that much online shopping but I do get "free" stuff,
and factory software and discounted stuff, and I "register" stuff, etc.,
all of which, as I showed, is also scanned by Google & saved separately.

Google apparently considered all of this stuff, as "receipts".

I believe you - where you must just not get many things that Google
considers "receipts" to your particular email address that you kindly
checked at our request.

Some things in my permanent receipt cash _were_ receipts, such as this set
of 6 tires for about $100 a tire, match mounted, balanced, & installed:
<https://i.postimg.cc/YCCVKctN/purchase09.jpg>

But _plenty_ of other things were _not_ what I'd consider, a receipt.

For example, my own account, admittedly sparse, has stuff like the serial
number and address details of my tire registration cards and freebies from
my cellular carrier, and hacked factory software from China, it would be
interesting for others who read this message to bring something of value to
the potluck picnic which is Usenet by adding the types of things _they_
found in their permanent Google receipt cache.
<https://i.postimg.cc/mDmsBp3H/purchase05.jpg>

And do I really want Google to save my purchase of BMW factory software
for Mac & Windows which isn't available, retail, anywhere in the world,
from BMW (which is used to code the scores of ECUs in a typical bimmer)?
<https://i.postimg.cc/KvGVcYKd/purchase03.jpg>

And does Google really need to know my carrier lent me a cellular repeater
and femtocell, at no cost whatsoever to me, to bathe my home in cellular
signal?
<https://i.postimg.cc/zDsZJNwN/purchase02.jpg>

As far as I know so far, the _only_ way to stop this, is to delete the
receipt from your Google mail account (maybe there's a way to automatically
transform the receipts short of scanning them and posting them as images?)
<https://i.postimg.cc/vTXjyRGR/purchase01.jpg>

Given this scanning is _outside_ the normal privacy controls:
<https://myaccount.google.com/data-and-personalization>

The questions I ask that I suggest we need to consider how to answer are:
1. What actually does Google consider an "electronic receipt" anyway?
2. How can we permanently turn this scanning off (or pause it)?
<https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sat, 18 May 2019 08:25:11 -0000 (UTC), John Doe wrote:

> The fact getting rid of
> it is difficult is no surprise. They make it that way, intentionally.
> Apparently stealing information has become their forte.

In agreement, it does seem clear that Google keeps this receipt scanning
separate from the rest of the so-called "privacy" controls located here:
<https://www.engadget.com/2015/06/01/google-privacy-security-hub/>

Worse, the _only_ obvious way to delete this receipt scanning appears to be
to literally delete the email itself.
<https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>

Since Usenet is a huge potluck picnic, I'd like to ask that we spend our
time trying to _solve_ the stated problem set, which take work to solve.

For example, maybe we can automatically PDF all incoming emailed receipts,
and then have them resent to us via an automated process?

The questions I ask that I suggest we need to consider how to answer are:
1. What actually does Google consider an "electronic receipt" anyway?
2. How can we permanently turn this scanning off (or pause it)?
<https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>

I think the solution is something "automated" that is software that runs
locally, that "recognizes" what Google sees as a receipt, and then
automagically strips it out and resends it in a format that Google does not
scan.

For example, does anyone have an IMAGE or PDF of a receipt, that does NOT
show up in the Google permanent receipt cache?

[Carlos E.R.]

On 18/05/2019 18.56, Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> On Sat, 18 May 2019 09:16:27 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
>
>> Not a clue, but I looked again. My accounts are empty, but hubby's
>> account has one entry going back over a year ago. He wouldn't have done
>> anything in his account, which he only accesses using 'nail' (linux
>> text-only).
>>
>> I normally do all the on-line shopping, but he must have ordered that
>> thing while I was gone. I've never done anything to block anything at
>> the gmail site, I rely on Thunderbird to deal with spam. Unfortunately
>> every once in a while it decides that real mail from friends and
>> relatives is spam and puts it in the junk folder. Retraining doesn't
>> help. This is why I don't delete it automatically.
>
> Hi The Real Bev,
>
> It's interesting that you found almost literally nothing in your receipt
> cache, where I wonder, aloud, if most people have a similar experience?
>
> The questions that we all need to consider how to answer are:
> 1. What actually does Google consider an "electronic receipt" anyway?
> 2. How can we permanently turn this scanning off (or pause it)?
> <https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>

Spanish:
<https://www.adslzone.net/2019/05/18/google-compras-online-gmail/>

> But _plenty_ of other things were _not_ what I'd consider, a receipt.

Then train it.


I don't see why you are so worked out about this. It is a feature and it
was announced. I knew. And it is in the terms and conditions of the
gmail account that it is machine read and parsed.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sat, 18 May 2019 20:08:43 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> I don't see why you are so worked out about this. It is a feature and it
> was announced. I knew. And it is in the terms and conditions of the
> gmail account that it is machine read and parsed.

Hi Carlos,

We've both been on Usenet for quite a long time so we've heard all the bs.

Everyone loves to claim that they know everything (just ask Diesel who
claimed he knew how to write to the iOS visible file system from Windows
when we easily proved he was simply making it all up).

The fact you claim to know what most people clearly did NOT know is
irrelevant if you haven't inform4ed people of the problem and, more
importantly, of the potential solutions.

So it's not my concern that you claim to be omnipotent, because even if you
knew it (which I highly doubt), why didn't you show us how to _SOLVE_ the
problems it presents?

Most of the "how to set up privacy on Gmail" don't mention it, for example:
<https://gawker.com/5800868/how-google-spies-on-your-gmail-account-and-how-to-stop-it>

Even Google's own pages on privacy don't apparently mention it:
<https://safety.google/privacy/privacy-controls/>

Where this news broke only in the last few days, e.g., this was published
today:
<https://www.techspot.com/news/80134-google-uses-receipts-sent-gmail-log-online-purchases.html>

Remember, this particular privacy stash is in a completely different place
from the normal privacy stash of Google:
o THIS ONE: <https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>
o NORMAL ONE: <https://myaccount.google.com/data-and-personalization>

So I highly doubt anyone who says they knew all about this, actually is
telling the truth - but maybe you are a genius that knows what nobody else
knows, and that's OK as that's not my beef.

My quest is simply to inform people that this (apparently undocumented)
'feature' exists, and then I'm asking for help in stopping it from
happening (which, at the moment, appears to be impossible).

Nonetheless, on the home repair group, Clare, who has helped us greatly in
the past with technical issues, has provided the following suggestions
today, which I add here for the benefit of the overall group.

On Sat, 18 May 2019 15:58:18 -0400, Clare Snyder wrote:

> Doesn't meen youhave to "sell your soul" to Google to get e-mail.

Hi Clare,

Agreed on the fact there's no need to "sell your soul" to Google.

I saw the purposefully helpful suggestion from rbowman of Proton, which
I've tested in the past, but I don't remember why I didn't keep it so I'll
try anew as if there was a better solution, I'd seek it out - although -
sometimes the "fancy" tools are no better in the end than the
tried-and-true basic boring tools.

LATER EDIT: I also saw your purposefully helpful suggestions of alternative
Email services other than Gmail below! (Thanks - I'll test them out.)

> Same reason I will NEVER use Chrome as a browser.

No disagreement here on Chrome.

Chrome is banned from my systems, where there are _plenty_ of privacy based
Chromium-based browsers, e.g., Epic or Opera on Windows, both of which
claim to be a free VPN but which are both really encrypted web-based
proxies. (And there's Brave, which is a tor-by-tab enabled browser.)

And non-Chromium-based privacy browsers too (e.g., TBB).

> Not a big fan of
> Android either for the same reason.

Be careful here, as most people, IMHO, who use iOS, are highly influenced
by bullshit marketing, as the sad fact is and always was that iOS has very
little of the privacy that Android has, where most people only know the
cherry-picked examples that some marketing organization feeds them; but not
the full factual details about privacy.

For example, it's _easy_ to remove almost all Google privacy intrusions on
Android while it's impossible to have the same kind of privacy on iOS.

We have a loooooooong very detailed discussion of this easily proven fact
on the smartphone ngs, so I won't belabor the issue here other than to say
anyone who feels iOS is somehow (magically?) more private than Android,
doesn't know either system to _any_ level of comprehension.

All they know is marketing bullshit.

See factual details here:
o What is the factual truth about PRIVACY differences or similarities
between the Android & iOS mobile phone ecosystems?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/FCKRA_3i9CY>

> When you use ANY Google service or
> product, you are putting everything you do on view to Google - who
> will sell you to the highest (or any) bidder.

This is true, IMHO, that Google sees everything you let them see.

Just like I stated the fact is that you can easily almost completely
eliminate Google from Android without _any_ loss of functionality, we
_should_ be able to eliminate this specific offshoot separate privacy hive
of our stored receipts.
o Is there any free FUNCTIONALITY that you need to do on Android, that you
can't do WITHOUT a Google Account?
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.mobile.android/xzaii4eUY_E>

What we need is a similar solution of eliminating this receipt hive.

Obviously, it's Google's fault for not putting this receipt hive along with
the other privacy hives which are able to be "paused".
<https://myaccount.google.com/data-and-personalization>

Clearly, one short-term workaround, staying within the Gmail ecosystem, is
to print the emailed receipt to a format which Google doesn't scan (e.g.,
PDF or JPEG), and then reattach that receipt to an email (if you wish to
store it in your Google account).

The main problem with the short-term solutions, such as printing to PDF and
saving the PDF'd receipt in a folder on your system, is that _new_ receipts
will _still_ get archived - since I couldn't find a way to "pause" this
receipt hive.

One potential permanent solution might be a local filter, such as a
procmail server for example, which automatically re-creates a local email
that is in an image format, and hence less likely to be scanned by Google.

Or, as rbowman suggested, a better freeware email solution, perhaps
o <>https://protonmail.com/>
Which claims:
o Open source
o Works with any MUA
o Swiss privacy laws
o End-to-end encryption
o No personal information or even IP addresses logged

I will set this up and test and write back the results on the related
platform ngs, so that everyone benefits from the efforts of others bringing
value to the Usenet potluck picnic.

> ANyone whoknows anything about Google knew that 5 years or more ago.

Did you _really_ know that Google keeps the receipts _separately?_
o And, did you know it's not part of the _normal_ privacy stuff?

Really?
o I find that hard to believe - but it _could_ be true.
(I'm not going to belabor whether you knew or not.)

Nonetheless, even if you did know about it, there's no mention from you in
the past that you noted of how to solve the problem - so - it doesn't help
to know about it - but I do see that you kindly provided potential
solutions below - which is great added value to the Usenet picnic to share.

> Nothing -= as I don't USE Google

NOTE: Proton Mail, suggested by rbowman, seems like a decent choice, where
I see you provided alternatives, which I will test out.

> Best? Your own private email server - locked down like Fort Knox.

I think you _still_ need IP address protection if you're setting up
sendmail at home, don't you?

I guess you could automate every sendmail batch request to include a
connection to VPN - which should work. And, there's DDNS if you don't have
a static IP address, for example.

If folks have working scripts, that's what we should be discussing then, as
it's not rocket science to set up a sendmail server - but - the IP address
protection is the problem.

> Acceptable? What does your ISP use? Yahoo and MegaMailServers are two
> relatively reputable services contracted by many ISPs.

Hehhehheh... my ISP?
o My situation is not like most since I get my Internet via an antenna.

Most people though don't live on a mountaintop, so they probably have a
cable (and pipes) which feed their homes, so for _them_, that's a
potentially viable solution.

> Others have
> their own in-house mail servers - like TechSavvy . Axigen is
> another.. If you want to "dance with a different devil" - one that is
> somewhat more benign than google, youcan use outlook.com (formerly
> Windows Live Mail and Hotmail) or Mail.com, or even ProtonMail or
> Tutanota (which are fully encrypted, apparently) or Yandex? or ZOHO?
> or GMX, or even AOL Mail?

Ah! Now that's value to be brought to the potluck picnic to share!

These are all nice starting suggestions for _replacement_ email service:
o <https://protonmail.com/> free, no private information, no IP logs
o <https://www.axigen.com/> mail & calendar, (business solution)
o <https://teksavvy.com/services/> seems to be an ISP???
o <https://tutanota.com/> OSS, encryption, all platforms, free, ad free
o <https://mail.yandex.com/> 10GB storage, free?, no personal information
o <https://www.zoho.com/mail/> free, requires personal information
o <https://www.gmx.com/mail/> free, requires personal information,

Always keeping to the spirit of a general purpose solution, these appear
upon the first pass to be free and they appear, on just the first skim of
the main web page, to not log your IP address or ask (or require) personal
information during the sign-up process:
o <https://protonmail.com/> free, no private information, no IP logs
o <https://tutanota.com/> free, no private information, no IP logs
o <https://mail.yandex.com/> free?, no private info, IP logs?

> There are other (paid) services like
> AuthSMTP, and FastMail. AppRiver is another excellent paid service
> with many security options. With many ov these you will need to
> register a domain which is a separate expense (about $10 a year, +/-)

Thanks for the payware solutions, where some above seemed to be payware
also (at least upon initial inspection), but where payware instantly
relegates the solution to a non-general solution - where the cost of
freeware is in the immense testing involved - while the prelimary to
payware is the freeware.

Once we know what the freeware is capable of, then and only then do we have
the information necessary to evaluate our payware needs.

That's the classic two-step process to using payware, where, almost always,
the freeware does not only what the payware does, but often _more_ than the
payware does - but each functionality situation is different.

>>4. Is there an automated way to locally intercept & reattach receipts
> Not if they come to you through Google. Do you understand how e-mail
> works? Things like SMTP. MAPI, IMAP, POP, and all that complex stuff?

Hi Clare,
I cut my teeth on computers during the days of the punched card and IBM
JCL, where the IBM 1130 and PDP 11 was something I used in college, and
then I worked on a variety of DEC and Masscomp boxes until Sun took over
(and died), so, um, yeah, I know that stuff (I wrote hundreds of procmail
filters, for example, in the days when we actually _complained_ to the
server admin if we received a spam, and we used our actual email addresses
in tin or rn).

> Do you know the difference between a mailserver and an e-mail client?

Um... yes. MUA is the old term, as I'm sure you're aware of (also MTA).
[Then there's LDA and MDA, but let's not go into all these TLAs.]
o Plain old "mailx" was what I used on Linux for my "client"
o Then Windows & the Mac had Eudora for the longest time as the "client"
Well before Google existed.

In the olden days, with our ISPs, we had to get these settings:
o We started with pop3 server settings & smtp server credentials
o Then we moved to imap4 (which didn't download the mail locally)
o And, until AT&T joined up with Cuomo, we had the ISP's nntp server:port

> You can use Mail2Web.com as your webmail if your ISP does not provide
> an interface like Horde or Roundcube or SquirrelMail (most do)

My ISP is a WISP with about 50 customers locally.
o We do our own antenna installs and self-help for the neighbors

Mostly we use powerful WiFi radios, of which I have a half dozen scattered
about - here's a shot I took just now of just one corner of the basement of
my house, for example
<https://i.postimg.cc/brGyw8cM/purchase10.jpg>
[In that photo is also the cellular repeater, a wired repeater, and a few
powerful 2.4GHz & 5GHz transceivers, not all of which are in current use).

While that's just a half dozen radios, I have at least a dozen of them
scattered about as access points and to connect with the WISP & to
neighbors a few miles away, as we pass our Internet back and forth over
Fresnel zones and up the steep mountainside to paint the deep canyons
below.

All we get from the ISP is the Internet - where that's all we need.

I'm not sure what you mean by "mail2web" though, as there seem to be a few
outfits using that name, e.g.,
o <http://mail2web.com/>
o <http://www.zuter.com/mail2web.htm>

And, for Horde, vs Roundcute vs SquirrelMail, we can refer to this review:
o
<https://www.thewebmaster.com/cpanel-articles/horde-roundcube-or-squirrelmail/>
o <https://www.exabytes.sg/blog/which-webmail-should-you-choose/>
o <https://blog.arvixe.com/horde-squirrelmail-and-roundcube/>
o <https://documentation.cpanel.net/display/CKB/Which+Webmail+Application+Should+I+Choose>
Where:
o Horde webmail - full suite of feaures
o Roundcube webmail - most populare - but with limited features
o Squirrelmail webmail - limited functionality but easy to use (died 4/2018)
And where all apparently require a "cpanel account".
o <https://cpanel.net/>

But a web browser is, by most accounts, an horrific way to obtain email,
where a dedicated MUA is the way to go, IMHO - but that's a different
question altogether.

In summary, you've brought value to share at the Potluck Picnic that is
Usenet, where the first task following up on your purposefully helpful post
is to explore the viable freeware mail services which can _replace_ google
email functionality as a global and general solution for everyone on all
platforms.

Thanks for bringing something of value to the Usenet potluck picnic.
There's plenty of general use for users to followup with more details based
on their adding of their valuable experience to the Usenet potluck!

[John Doe]

Please quote the language that allows Google to read my emails...

--
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas es.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!weretis.net!feeder7.news.weretis.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
> From: "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas es.invalid>
> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware
> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.
> Date: Sat, 18 May 2019 14:17:23 +0200
> Lines: 9
> Message-ID: <jn95rf-amf.ln1 Telcontar.valinor>
> References: <qbo20u$m50$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbo2qi$c62$1 dont-email.me> <qbog7e$ib4$2 dont-email.me>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Trace: individual.net B1ZLV4c9vOkqz7sUe8ZwTgWzim7Kz6JGMkgVzmATkycMSHc+mv
> X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:lAb1zg191uB1AjikUGpnv7MPZa0=
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
> In-Reply-To: <qbog7e$ib4$2 dont-email.me>
> Content-Language: en-CA
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:61996 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121693 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94798 alt.comp.freeware:328095

[Paul]

John Doe wrote:
> Please quote the language that allows Google to read my emails...
>

https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en

"Our automated systems analyze your content (including emails) <===
to provide you personally relevant product features,
such as customized search results,
tailored advertising, <===
and spam and malware detection.

This analysis occurs as the content is
sent, received, and when it is stored.
"

It's handy that they mention that, but is anyone surprised ?

They're not Apple. Their main source of income, comes from
that paragraph. All their other flawed business are merely
an "expense" on their advertising goldmine.

If they could scan the air you're breathing, they would.

Paul

[John Doe]

"Arlen G. Holder" <arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

Do not expand the group list in the middle of your own thread, moron.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sat, 18 May 2019 22:07:30 -0000 (UTC), John Doe wrote:

> Please quote the language that allows Google to read my emails...

What I would like to find, or if someone else can find it, is where does
Google EXPLAIN that they're doing this type of archival, where, clearly,
*free* stuff and mandatory US regulatory registrations are _also_ archived.

Clearly this stuff is in a _different_ place than the "normal" stuff.
o But did Google ever STATE that they were doing this?

To me, the issue is HONESTY ... not PRIVACY.
o Was Google honest about describing this process?

The news seems to think that Google was not upfront about this:
<https://www.techspot.com/news/80134-google-uses-receipts-sent-gmail-log-online-purchases.html>

I've already asked my buddies who work in Mountainview to show me WHERE
Google has advertised that they're doing this - but I haven't heard back
from them yet.

Does ANYONE here claim one or both of two things:
1. Did you _know_ about this? (If so, how did you know?)
2. Do you know where Google was HONEST and UPFRONT about this?

Anyone, like Carlos, who claims that they _knew_ about this, has to tell us
_how_ they knew, because it's not obvious nor intuitive.

It's not about privacy; it's about honesty.
o Where did Google describe this specific archival process?
(Which captures free stuff & mandatory US regulatory stuff too.)

[John Doe]

"Carlos E.R." <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> Then train it.

That is just another troll.

> I don't see why you are so worked out about this.

It's a huge precedent.

The problem is... If Google can read our emails for this trivial
purpose, then Google can read our emails for any other purpose it
feels like reading our emails for.

> It is a feature

No, it's not. Even if it were useful, it is not nearly functional as
it is (already) done by online merchants.

> and it was announced.

Point to it...

> I knew.

Or maybe you are lying.

> And it is in the terms and conditions of the gmail account that it
> is machine read and parsed.

Quote that language...

For any purpose Google feels like reading it?

Calling it "machine read" is irrelevant, it's being read by Google.
And apparently they think they can read our emails for any purpose.

It's called "getting your foot in the door" or "setting a
precedent". It is an invasion of privacy.

An email provider should not be reading our emails, unless under a
court order.







--

>
> --
> Cheers, Carlos.
>
> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.uzoreto.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
> From: "Carlos E.R." <robin_...@es.invalid>
> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware,comp.sys.mac.apps,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.os.linux

> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

> Date: Sat, 18 May 2019 20:08:43 +0200
> Lines: 40
> Message-ID: <bau5rf-...@Telcontar.valinor>
> References: <qbo20u$m50$1...@news.mixmin.net> <qbo2qi$c62$1...@dont-email.me> <qbp94u$bla$1...@news.mixmin.net> <qbpb4s$9o0$1...@dont-email.me> <qbpdfb$khk$1...@news.mixmin.net>

> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> X-Trace: individual.net im5I0OTRbikkRRUSukrXFAb09mRKC+RhbcXJ6A0MrRELQlYw2L
> X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:j8/6OZXovg2U3/+siRAMqJv4O0s=

> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1

> In-Reply-To: <qbpdfb$khk$1...@news.mixmin.net>
> Content-Language: en-CA
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:62009 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121718 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94846 alt.comp.freeware:328117 comp.sys.mac.apps:70964 microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:141799 alt.os.linux:56591
>

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sat, 18 May 2019 18:37:32 -0400, Paul wrote:

> https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en

Hi Paul,
Just to be clear, nobody expects privacy from Google.
o We expect HONESTY - not privacy.

Google has a privacy page - which apparently DOES NOT MENTION this process.

Google has a way to turn off some things (aka "pause") but that does NOT
INCLUDE THIS PROCESS.

SO while I fully comprehend what Lyndon Johnson called the shirt that
covers everything (the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution based on now-known lies),
Google also has a shirt that covers everything.

But what I care about isn't the privacy of this - but the HONESTY of it.

Two simple questions to separate the bullshit from the facts:
1. Did ANYONE on this ng _know_ about this (if so, _how_ did you know)?
2. Where on the net does Google describe _this_ specific process?

Bear in mind this process archives free stuff and mandatory US government
regulatory stuff - so it's not just the stuff you paid for with dollars.

[nospam]

In article <qbq1fd$9u$1...@dont-email.me>, Paul <nos...@needed.invalid>
wrote:

yep, and they're getting close to doing exactly that.

google tracks not just what you do online, but what you do *offline*:

<https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/30/17801880/google-mastercard-data-onli
ne-ads-offline-purchase-history-privacy>
Google reportedly paid Mastercard millions of dollars for data on
what people have been buying. It used that data to build a tool for
advertisers that would break down whether people who had clicked
online ads later went on to purchase a product at a physical retail
store.

[nospam]

In article <qbq1n2$u2r$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen G. Holder

<arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

>
> What I would like to find, or if someone else can find it, is where does
> Google EXPLAIN that they're doing this type of archival, where, clearly,
> *free* stuff and mandatory US regulatory registrations are _also_ archived.

terms of service, privacy policy, license agreements.

> Clearly this stuff is in a _different_ place than the "normal" stuff.

no

> o But did Google ever STATE that they were doing this?

yes.

[nospam]

In article <qbpvn2$frn$1...@dont-email.me>, John Doe

<alway...@message.header> wrote:

> Please quote the language that allows Google to read my emails...

<https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en>
Googleąs privacy policies explain how we treat your personal data
and protect your privacy when you use our Services. By using our
Services, you agree that Google can use such data in accordance
with our privacy policies.
...
When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or
through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with)
a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create
derivative works (such as those resulting from translations,
adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works
better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform,
publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in
this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and
improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license
continues even if you stop using our Services (for example, for a
business listing you have added to Google Maps). Some Services
may offer you ways to access and remove content that has been
provided to that Service. Also, in some of our Services, there are
terms or settings that narrow the scope of our use of the content
submitted in those Services. Make sure you have the necessary
rights to grant us this license for any content that you submit to
our Services.

Our automated systems analyze your content (including emails) to

provide you personally relevant product features, such as customized

search results, tailored advertising, and spam and malware detection.

This analysis occurs as the content is sent, received, and when it is
stored.

<https://tools.google.com/dlpage/res/webmmf/en/eula.html>
2.1 In order to use the Services, you must first agree to the Terms.
You may not use the Services if you do not accept the Terms.

2.2 You can accept the Terms by:
(A) clicking to accept or agree to the Terms, where this option is
made available to you by Google in the user interface for any
Service; or
(B) by actually using the Services. In this case, you understand
and agree that Google will treat your use of the Services as
acceptance of the Terms from that point onwards.

...
8.3 Google reserves the right (but shall have no obligation) to
pre-screen, review, flag, filter, modify, refuse or remove any or
all Content from any Service. For some of the Services, Google
may provide tools to filter out explicit sexual content. These
tools include the SafeSearch preference settings (see
http://www.google.com/help/customize.html#safe). In addition,
there are commercially available services and software to limit
access to material that you may find objectionable.

11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold
in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the
Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give
Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and
non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate,
publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any
Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the
Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google
to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked
for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those
Services.

[nospam]

In article <qbq1rq$frn$4...@dont-email.me>, John Doe

<alway...@message.header> wrote:

>
>
> It's a huge precedent.

it isn't.

> The problem is... If Google can read our emails for this trivial
> purpose, then Google can read our emails for any other purpose it
> feels like reading our emails for.

unless it's end to end encrypted, so can any other email provider and
any system that relays email.

> An email provider should not be reading our emails, unless under a
> court order.

should not and does not are very often different.

[John Doe]

Of course Google is stealing information. Otherwise there would be a
way to turn it off. Otherwise it would not be on by default.
Otherwise it would not be a useless service that is ALREADY provided
by merchants in a functional form. Otherwise it would not be the
only such invasion of privacy of its kind.

Point to the language in Gmail's email agreement...

Point to the same language in any other email provider's
agreement...

I would look myself, but I do not do wild goose chases. I learned to
avoid them long ago. You make the assertion, you provide the
citation...

But of course this poster is just a troll, an Apple reject that has
been infesting this group for many months...

--
nospam <nospam nospam.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: nospam <nospam nospam.invalid>
> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware

> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

> Date: Sat, 18 May 2019 10:34:04 -0400
> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
> Lines: 20
> Message-ID: <180520191034048323%nospam nospam.invalid>
> References: <qbo20u$m50$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbofh7$ib4$1 dont-email.me>
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="1d84c661dae6d5dd547d524fc5c8c359"; logging-data="31775"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+F+0HyAGls4DiH+eIp6MPI"
> User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:pU2Z4HlA4PBehaSFJWKgWCUYVQ8=
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:61997 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121699 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94819 alt.comp.freeware:328103
>
> In article <qbofh7$ib4$1 dont-email.me>, John Doe

[nospam]

In article <qbq26g$frn$5...@dont-email.me>, John Doe

<alway...@message.header> wrote:

> Of course Google is stealing information. Otherwise there would be a
> way to turn it off. Otherwise it would not be on by default.

it's not stealing when the user *agrees* to provide it.

> Otherwise it would not be a useless service that is ALREADY provided
> by merchants in a functional form. Otherwise it would not be the
> only such invasion of privacy of its kind.

if you don't agree to the terms, don't use the service.

> Point to the language in Gmail's email agreement...

see other post

> Point to the same language in any other email provider's
> agreement...

refer to the terms of service for each service.

> I would look myself, but I do not do wild goose chases. I learned to
> avoid them long ago. You make the assertion, you provide the
> citation...

there is no wild goose chase.

> But of course this poster is just a troll

ad hominem.

[John Doe]

Apparently that was added in 2014. There might be some litigation
still occurring, if it hasn't been settled.

I believe the point of contention in that is "personally relevant
product features". That is an obscure term that can mean just about
anything. Providing "customized search results" sounds like a
dubious task. I want search results according to my search criteria.
It's all about advertising.

I doubt there is such language in any other email provider.

[John Doe]

This Apple reject wouldn't know a "precedent"
from its mother's teeth...

--
nospam <nospam nospam.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: nospam <nospam nospam.invalid>
> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware

> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

> Date: Sat, 18 May 2019 18:47:55 -0400

> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider

> Lines: 23
> Message-ID: <180520191847556248%nospam nospam.invalid>
> References: <qbo20u$m50$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbo2qi$c62$1 dont-email.me> <qbp94u$bla$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbpb4s$9o0$1 dont-email.me> <qbpdfb$khk$1 news.mixmin.net> <bau5rf-d5u.ln1 Telcontar.valinor> <qbq1rq$frn$4 dont-email.me>

> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

> Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0589bef4fdf9104cfbb0edb47ba79ef5"; logging-data="31894"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/fuCDNuQBKf4edY8AOdCHU"

> User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)

> Cancel-Lock: sha1:6f1vHSnBaLOY3DvtQB201MkPAqk=
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:62024 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121738 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94884 alt.comp.freeware:328138
>
> In article <qbq1rq$frn$4 dont-email.me>, John Doe

[nospam]

In article <qbq3eh$frn$6...@dont-email.me>, John Doe

<alway...@message.header> wrote:

>
> I doubt there is such language in any other email provider.

there is.

[John Doe]

This is the same reject troll encountered in the Apple groups
that made its way into this group several months ago...

--
nospam <nospam nospam.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: nospam <nospam nospam.invalid>

> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware,free.spam

> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

> Date: Sat, 18 May 2019 18:59:32 -0400

> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider

> Lines: 32
> Message-ID: <180520191859328069%nospam nospam.invalid>
> References: <qbo20u$m50$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbofh7$ib4$1 dont-email.me> <180520191034048323%nospam nospam.invalid> <qbq26g$frn$5 dont-email.me>

> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

> Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0589bef4fdf9104cfbb0edb47ba79ef5"; logging-data="6426"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+kX/rCp32KGmd67DeO1D5n"

> User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)

> Cancel-Lock: sha1:boqIEvzXJ9jGCmxvj0rlHGcje4s=
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:62026 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121741 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94886 alt.comp.freeware:328140 free.spam:12257
>
> In article <qbq26g$frn$5 dont-email.me>, John Doe

[John Doe]

Then point to it, you Apple reject troll...

--
nospam <nospam nospam.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: nospam <nospam nospam.invalid>

> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware
> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

> Date: Sat, 18 May 2019 19:15:14 -0400

> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider

> Lines: 7
> Message-ID: <180520191915144581%nospam nospam.invalid>
> References: <qbo20u$m50$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbo2qi$c62$1 dont-email.me> <qbog7e$ib4$2 dont-email.me> <jn95rf-amf.ln1 Telcontar.valinor> <qbpvn2$frn$1 dont-email.me> <qbq1fd$9u$1 dont-email.me> <qbq3eh$frn$6 dont-email.me>
> Mime-Version: 1.0

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

> Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0589bef4fdf9104cfbb0edb47ba79ef5"; logging-data="12300"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19LEvdtFbteEV4kTMj5hskM"

> User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)

> Cancel-Lock: sha1:GSIW+WzGPL6TN3ctzZSgZQbXbFE=
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:62029 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121744 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94889 alt.comp.freeware:328144
>
> In article <qbq3eh$frn$6 dont-email.me>, John Doe

[Carlos E.R.]

On 18/05/2019 23.41, Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> On Sat, 18 May 2019 20:08:43 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>> I don't see why you are so worked out about this. It is a feature and it
>> was announced. I knew. And it is in the terms and conditions of the
>> gmail account that it is machine read and parsed.
>
> Hi Carlos,
>
> We've both been on Usenet for quite a long time so we've heard all the bs.
>
> Everyone loves to claim that they know everything (just ask Diesel who
> claimed he knew how to write to the iOS visible file system from Windows
> when we easily proved he was simply making it all up).
>
> The fact you claim to know what most people clearly did NOT know is
> irrelevant if you haven't inform4ed people of the problem and, more
> importantly, of the potential solutions.

Why should I? I don't see any problem, nor anything to be solved.


(bullshit skipped)

There is very clearly in my gmail web page a Label named receipts, since
some months. I saw it. And I saw somewhere they mentioned it. If you
call me stupid for not sharing how to remove it (and I don't want to
remove it), I'll call you stupid for not seeing it.

The terms and conditions, which I accepted more than a decade ago, says
that they machine scan every post and will do things with them, like add
adverts and features. We commented on this many years ago (not talking
of usenet), and we decided that anyone wanting privacy should not use
gmail. So most of my receipts are on another account.

It is currently empty, but it should show some. Perhaps I should
complain to Google for not finding those receipts. Done! I have trained
Gmail to detect some of my receipts.


Look, an article dated 2013 where they talk about this feature:

<https://www.itworld.com/article/2711018/find-all-your-receipts-in-gmail-automatically.html>


Gosh!

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 19/05/2019 00.44, John Doe wrote:
> "Carlos E.R." <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Then train it.
>
> That is just another troll.
>
>> I don't see why you are so worked out about this.
>
> It's a huge precedent.
>
> The problem is... If Google can read our emails for this trivial
> purpose, then Google can read our emails for any other purpose it
> feels like reading our emails for.

Of course, and they do.

>> It is a feature
>
> No, it's not. Even if it were useful, it is not nearly functional as
> it is (already) done by online merchants.
>
>> and it was announced.
>
> Point to it...

Example from 2013

<https://www.itworld.com/article/2711018/find-all-your-receipts-in-gmail-automatically.html>

>
>> I knew.
>
> Or maybe you are lying.
>
>> And it is in the terms and conditions of the gmail account that it
>> is machine read and parsed.
>
> Quote that language...

Gosh, are you that ignorant?

>
> For any purpose Google feels like reading it?
>
> Calling it "machine read" is irrelevant, it's being read by Google.
> And apparently they think they can read our emails for any purpose.
>
> It's called "getting your foot in the door" or "setting a
> precedent". It is an invasion of privacy.
>
> An email provider should not be reading our emails, unless under a
> court order.

LOL. This is Google, not your mail provider. They told you. Go google it.

2009

<http://ask-leo.com/is_yahoo_or_gmail_or_hotmail_or_reading_my_email.html>


2004

<https://epic.org/privacy/gmail/faq.html#21>
<https://epic.org/privacy/gmail/faq.html#25>


--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 19/05/2019 00.47, nospam wrote:
> In article <qbq1rq$frn$4...@dont-email.me>, John Doe
> <alway...@message.header> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> It's a huge precedent.
>
> it isn't.

They told it from day one...

>
>> The problem is... If Google can read our emails for this trivial
>> purpose, then Google can read our emails for any other purpose it
>> feels like reading our emails for.
>
> unless it's end to end encrypted, so can any other email provider and
> any system that relays email.

Absolutely.



--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

Thanks, you saved me the effort :-D

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[John Doe]

If there were nothing unusual about the practice of reading
customers' emails, other email providers would do it. But they
don't. Microsoft doesn't. There are some ads in Hotmail, or you can
pay for the service.

It's a SHOCKING practice. Government is not even allowed to read our
emails, without a court order. At least here in the United States,
no one is allowed to monitor customer communications without a court
order. Not the mail service and not the telephone service. It should
be no different for email. Sooner or later Google will get in
trouble for abusing it.

A Google fanboy from Spain...

--
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas es.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.dns-netz.com!news.freedyn.net!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail

> From: "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas es.invalid>

> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware,comp.sys.mac.apps,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,alt.os.linux

> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

> Date: Sun, 19 May 2019 02:26:30 +0200
> Lines: 49
> Message-ID: <mek6rf-40j.ln1 Telcontar.valinor>
> References: <qbo20u$m50$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbo2qi$c62$1 dont-email.me> <qbp94u$bla$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbpb4s$9o0$1 dont-email.me> <qbpdfb$khk$1 news.mixmin.net> <bau5rf-d5u.ln1 Telcontar.valinor> <qbpu6u$ms3$1 news.mixmin.net>

> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> X-Trace: individual.net h3Kq2Ej1OfnnNm4IwM0uZQFcTq+SUvNqhQcDqpzmnG1Yq2seJh
> X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:Y4o1zPNDRjQsZNay8Uh71oDTS6U=

> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1

> In-Reply-To: <qbpu6u$ms3$1 news.mixmin.net>
> Content-Language: en-CA
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:62032 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121752 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94896 alt.comp.freeware:328147 comp.sys.mac.apps:70966 microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:141804 alt.os.linux:56594

[Carlos E.R.]

On 19/05/2019 01.11, John Doe wrote:
> Paul <nos...@needed.invalid> wrote:
>
>> John Doe wrote:
>
>>> Please quote the language that allows Google to read my emails...
>
>> https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en
>>
>> "Our automated systems analyze your content (including emails) <===
>> to provide you personally relevant product features,
>> such as customized search results,
>> tailored advertising, <===
>> and spam and malware detection.
>>
>> This analysis occurs as the content is
>> sent, received, and when it is stored.
>> "
>>
>> It's handy that they mention that, but is anyone surprised ?
>>
>> They're not Apple. Their main source of income, comes from
>> that paragraph. All their other flawed business are merely
>> an "expense" on their advertising goldmine.
>>
>> If they could scan the air you're breathing, they would.
>
> Apparently that was added in 2014.

Just modified. It was there since ever.

There might be some litigation
> still occurring, if it hasn't been settled.
>
> I believe the point of contention in that is "personally relevant
> product features". That is an obscure term that can mean just about
> anything. Providing "customized search results" sounds like a
> dubious task. I want search results according to my search criteria.
> It's all about advertising.
>
> I doubt there is such language in any other email provider.

If they make money, they do the same thing.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 19/05/2019 01.16, John Doe wrote:

> This is the same reject troll encountered in the Apple groups
> that made its way into this group several months ago...
>

In this case he is absolutely right.


--
Cheers, Carlos.

[John Doe]

No, Google did not "tell it from day one". In fact, they had to add
language in 2014 to avoid lawsuits.

Microsoft does not read their customers emails. Problem is, this
poster comes from a country that isn't used to freedom we have here
in the United States...

--
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas es.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.unit0.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail

> From: "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas es.invalid>
> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware

> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

> Date: Sun, 19 May 2019 02:36:32 +0200
> Lines: 26
> Message-ID: <g1l6rf-4ej.ln1 Telcontar.valinor>
> References: <qbo20u$m50$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbo2qi$c62$1 dont-email.me> <qbp94u$bla$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbpb4s$9o0$1 dont-email.me> <qbpdfb$khk$1 news.mixmin.net> <bau5rf-d5u.ln1 Telcontar.valinor> <qbq1rq$frn$4 dont-email.me> <180520191847556248%nospam nospam.invalid>

> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> X-Trace: individual.net 0qPfCx7Edy5faAB3v+m3nwFU+iwqgrR5vVGE9FpgI0z0rq0uay
> X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:p9aPZuiO2lMUgIq6nHEkknCyvtk=

> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1

> In-Reply-To: <180520191847556248%nospam nospam.invalid>
> Content-Language: en-CA
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:62034 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121754 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94898 alt.comp.freeware:328149

>
> On 19/05/2019 00.47, nospam wrote:

>> In article <qbq1rq$frn$4 dont-email.me>, John Doe

[John Doe]

That the poster can find citations about the unethical practice is
not surprising. My question was about the user agreement. Whether
the poster knew about the unethical practice, only the Shadow knows.
And it still did not provide a Google "announcement" of the
practice.

The fact Google had to add language to its user agreement in 2014 is
telling. It was under pressure from lawsuits against the unethical
practice of reading its customers' emails.

This post is from a Spanish Google fanboy (perhaps an employee of
Google)...

--
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas es.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.unit0.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
> From: "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas es.invalid>
> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware

> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

> Date: Sun, 19 May 2019 02:35:28 +0200
> Lines: 70
> Message-ID: <gvk6rf-4ej.ln1 Telcontar.valinor>

> References: <qbo20u$m50$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbo2qi$c62$1 dont-email.me> <qbp94u$bla$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbpb4s$9o0$1 dont-email.me> <qbpdfb$khk$1 news.mixmin.net> <bau5rf-d5u.ln1 Telcontar.valinor> <qbq1rq$frn$4 dont-email.me>

> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> X-Trace: individual.net PHLmH21tGczOsUiXd7ObWAeSS/wbE9dHMEsJkSPprpj/loVx4A
> X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:yGh0v/0ZT39TSoGHsWtQZCdsu68=

> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1

> In-Reply-To: <qbq1rq$frn$4 dont-email.me>
> Content-Language: es-ES
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:62033 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121753 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94897 alt.comp.freeware:328148

>
> On 19/05/2019 00.44, John Doe wrote:

[John Doe]

The language was added to Google's user agreement in 2014.
Under pressure from lawsuits.

Microsoft started a campaign against Google for reading its
customers emails, so obviously Microsoft does not do it.

Stop spewing nonsense, point to the language in any other email
provider's user agreement...

--
"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas es.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.unit0.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
> From: "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas es.invalid>
> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware
> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

> Date: Sun, 19 May 2019 02:40:46 +0200
> Lines: 46
> Message-ID: <e9l6rf-4ej.ln1 Telcontar.valinor>
> References: <qbo20u$m50$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbo2qi$c62$1 dont-email.me> <qbog7e$ib4$2 dont-email.me> <jn95rf-amf.ln1 Telcontar.valinor> <qbpvn2$frn$1 dont-email.me> <qbq1fd$9u$1 dont-email.me> <qbq3eh$frn$6 dont-email.me>

> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

> X-Trace: individual.net 5TP+So52vMLEPZOr+M3zeA+wquYxQiNkV6qPbu1Lxy8g6yLB5q
> X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZUMRfZecwtsk4y5Znm2lWF1LDQc=

> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1

> In-Reply-To: <qbq3eh$frn$6 dont-email.me>
> Content-Language: en-CA
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:62037 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121757 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94901 alt.comp.freeware:328153

>
> On 19/05/2019 01.11, John Doe wrote:

[John Doe]

"Carlos E.R." <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> <https://epic.org/privacy/gmail/faq.html#21>

https://epic.org/privacy/gmail/faq.html#32

Apparently it violates California's wiretapping law.

Thanks for the link, Carlos... lol.

Now I get to look for litigation... Should be some. Maybe Google settles
out of court. I suppose maybe they could stop the litigation with an
adjudicated agreement. Otherwise seems it would be a continuous stream.

[John Doe]

LOL!!!

https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/329801/gmail-scanning-suit-proceeds-in-california.html

Of course it will be a long drawn out battle. But at least it's been
certified as a class action lawsuit. That's where the federal case
failed.

Brown v. Google, Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. 18CV324895
In Brown v. Google, Gallo LLP represents the first 24 non-Gmail
users seeking damages from Google for its violations of state laws
requiring both sides consent to intercept electronic communications
(email). California law (CIPA) provides $5,000 in statutory damages
per violation. Click the link below to see if you qualify. We
already got an injunction against Google in Matera v. Google,
preventing Google from intercepting and processing emails to @Gmail
addresses for advertising purposes. See www.gmailsettlement.com

[nospam]

In article <qbq8p7$1ep$3...@dont-email.me>, John Doe

<alway...@message.header> wrote:

>
> It's a SHOCKING practice. Government is not even allowed to read our
> emails, without a court order. At least here in the United States,
> no one is allowed to monitor customer communications without a court
> order. Not the mail service and not the telephone service. It should
> be no different for email. Sooner or later Google will get in
> trouble for abusing it.

false. law enforcement generally can't without a warrant, but others
can, which is partly how spam filtering works.

[nospam]

In article <qbq8ub$1ep$4...@dont-email.me>, John Doe

<alway...@message.header> wrote:

> No, Google did not "tell it from day one". In fact, they had to add
> language in 2014 to avoid lawsuits.

they did tell it from day one.

<https://variety.com/2017/digital/news/google-gmail-ads-emails-120247732
1/>
With that step, Google is getting rid of one of its most
controversial advertising features. Ever since Google first
introduced its free Gmail email service some 13 years ago, it
has been analyzing the text of emails to personalize advertising
displayed both within Gmail and elsewhere. Privacy advocates and
concerned users alike have long criticized this as a far-reaching
intrusion, but most other free email services have been doing the
same ã or at least reserved the rights to do so ã for years.
...
Does this mean that Google will stop looking at your email? Not
exactly. The company has also long been scanning Gmail accounts
for other reasons, and in fact increased product personalization
based on the emails you get over the years.

The Google app on your phone, for example, knows when your
next flight is leaving, and whether or not it has been delayed, based
on emails you get from airlines and travel booking sites. Similarly,
Google Calendar has begun to automatically add restaurant
reservations and similar events to your schedule based on the emails
you are getting. Google also has for some time automatically scanned
emails for links to potentially fraudulent sites, as well as to
filter out spam.

> Microsoft does not read their customers emails.

yes they do.

send a terrorist threat using outlook.com and see how well that works
out for you.

> Problem is, this
> poster comes from a country that isn't used to freedom we have here
> in the United States...

problem is, you don't understand how things work and call everyone else
a troll.

email, text messages, and anything else that's not encrypted can
potentially be read by others.

[nospam]

In article <g1l6rf-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> >>
> >> It's a huge precedent.
> >
> > it isn't.
>
> They told it from day one...

yep.

> >> The problem is... If Google can read our emails for this trivial
> >> purpose, then Google can read our emails for any other purpose it
> >> feels like reading our emails for.
> >
> > unless it's end to end encrypted, so can any other email provider and
> > any system that relays email.
>
> Absolutely.

yep, and well known since the first email was sent ~50 years ago.

[John Doe]

A persistent Apple fanboy troll that came to infest
this group many months ago...

--
nospam <nospam nospam.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: nospam <nospam nospam.invalid>
> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware

> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

> Date: Sat, 18 May 2019 22:43:39 -0400

> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider

> Lines: 13
> Message-ID: <180520192243394920%nospam nospam.invalid>
> References: <qbo20u$m50$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbo2qi$c62$1 dont-email.me> <qbp94u$bla$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbpb4s$9o0$1 dont-email.me> <qbpdfb$khk$1 news.mixmin.net> <bau5rf-d5u.ln1 Telcontar.valinor> <qbpu6u$ms3$1 news.mixmin.net> <mek6rf-40j.ln1 Telcontar.valinor> <qbq8p7$1ep$3 dont-email.me>
> Mime-Version: 1.0

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

> Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0589bef4fdf9104cfbb0edb47ba79ef5"; logging-data="10142"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX198/W9XwsgM02JqGwAClcNs"

> User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)

> Cancel-Lock: sha1:0Kmy9W46/yIobRp9KW45gS8We7U=
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:62044 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121765 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94916 alt.comp.freeware:328161
>
> In article <qbq8p7$1ep$3 dont-email.me>, John Doe

[John Doe]

The first Google result, the highlighted result, for "Does Microsoft read your emails?"

"MICROSOFT's email service, like Gmail, advertises for revenue, but
DOESN'T USE YOUR EMAILS TO TARGET THOSE ADS. They do scan for
security threats, like phishing links and possible malware
attachments, but NO ONE IS READING YOUR EMAILS at any stage of the
process."

This Apple reject has been trolling this group for many months now...

--
nospam <nospam nospam.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: nospam <nospam nospam.invalid>

> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware,free.spam

> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

> Date: Sat, 18 May 2019 22:43:41 -0400

> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider

> Lines: 49
> Message-ID: <180520192243414991%nospam nospam.invalid>
> References: <qbo20u$m50$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbo2qi$c62$1 dont-email.me> <qbp94u$bla$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbpb4s$9o0$1 dont-email.me> <qbpdfb$khk$1 news.mixmin.net> <bau5rf-d5u.ln1 Telcontar.valinor> <qbq1rq$frn$4 dont-email.me> <180520191847556248%nospam nospam.invalid> <g1l6rf-4ej.ln1 Telcontar.valinor> <qbq8ub$1ep$4 dont-email.me>

> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

> Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0589bef4fdf9104cfbb0edb47ba79ef5"; logging-data="10142"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+zvgjPo3Vl+3l/bABzZgbL"

> User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)

> Cancel-Lock: sha1:DhrzlNlAiBEB7J7KmI+923nKku4=
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:62045 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121766 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94917 alt.comp.freeware:328162 free.spam:12267
>
> In article <qbq8ub$1ep$4 dont-email.me>, John Doe

> <always.look message.header> wrote:
>
>> No, Google did not "tell it from day one". In fact, they had to add
>> language in 2014 to avoid lawsuits.
>
> they did tell it from day one.
>
> <https://variety.com/2017/digital/news/google-gmail-ads-emails-120247732
> 1/>
> With that step, Google is getting rid of one of its most
> controversial advertising features. Ever since Google first
> introduced its free Gmail email service some 13 years ago, it
> has been analyzing the text of emails to personalize advertising
> displayed both within Gmail and elsewhere. Privacy advocates and
> concerned users alike have long criticized this as a far-reaching
> intrusion, but most other free email services have been doing the

> same < or at least reserved the rights to do so < for years.

[nospam]

In article <qbqkt1$127$2...@dont-email.me>, John Doe

<alway...@message.header> wrote:

> The first Google result, the highlighted result, for "Does Microsoft read
> your emails?"
>
> "MICROSOFT's email service, like Gmail, advertises for revenue, but
> DOESN'T USE YOUR EMAILS TO TARGET THOSE ADS. They do scan for
> security threats, like phishing links and possible malware
> attachments, but NO ONE IS READING YOUR EMAILS at any stage of the
> process."

there aren't people in a back room reading emails, however, the
contents *is* scanned, exactly as that link states.

[John Doe]

Scanning for viruses is completely different than scanning for
user information.

There are in fact "people in a back room reading emails".

https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/2/17527972/gmail-app-developers-full-email-access

Some of those "trusted" companies include email managing firms
Return Path and Edison Software, which have had opportunities in the
past to access thousands of email accounts. The WSJ talked to both
companies, which said they had human engineers view hundreds to
thousands of email messages in order to train machine algorithms to
handle the data. Both Return Path's and Edison Software's privacy
policies mention that the companies will monitor emails. Still, they
don't mention that human engineers and not only machines have
access.

Edison Software responded in a statement to The Verge, "We have
since stopped this practice and expunged all such data in order to
stay consistent with our company's commitment to achieving the
highest standards possible for ensuring privacy."?

The situation is reminiscent of the conditions that led to
Facebook's Cambridge Analytica data sharing fiasco: something that
was common practice for years - letting third-party apps access
Facebook data - WAS EVENTUALLY ABUSED and fell under government and
public scrutiny once it became well known.



This Apple reject doesn't read, it just trolls its opinions. Such is
the way of a chronic liar. No need for facts. When you refute its
lies, it simply makes up more lies to cover its prior lies...

--
nospam <nospam nospam.invalid> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
> From: nospam <nospam nospam.invalid>

> Newsgroups: comp.mobile.android,misc.phone.mobile.iphone,alt.comp.os.windows-10,alt.comp.freeware,free.spam,free.spam

> Subject: Re: Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.

> Date: Sun, 19 May 2019 00:16:21 -0400

> Organization: A noiseless patient Spider

> Lines: 14
> Message-ID: <190520190016218686%nospam nospam.invalid>
> References: <qbo20u$m50$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbo2qi$c62$1 dont-email.me> <qbp94u$bla$1 news.mixmin.net> <qbpb4s$9o0$1 dont-email.me> <qbpdfb$khk$1 news.mixmin.net> <bau5rf-d5u.ln1 Telcontar.valinor> <qbq1rq$frn$4 dont-email.me> <180520191847556248%nospam nospam.invalid> <g1l6rf-4ej.ln1 Telcontar.valinor> <qbq8ub$1ep$4 dont-email.me> <180520192243414991%nospam nospam.invalid> <qbqkt1$127$2 dont-email.me>

> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

> Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0589bef4fdf9104cfbb0edb47ba79ef5"; logging-data="5333"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18KT0yJB3YlKFCdWdkN5UJY"

> User-Agent: Thoth/1.9.0 (Mac OS X)

> Cancel-Lock: sha1:NqqBnk+vztxvaHu0AE65HTTZnCI=
> Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.mobile.android:62049 misc.phone.mobile.iphone:121773 alt.comp.os.windows-10:94922 alt.comp.freeware:328167 free.spam:12270
>
> In article <qbqkt1$127$2 dont-email.me>, John Doe

[nospam]

In article <qbqmfl$127$3...@dont-email.me>, John Doe

<alway...@message.header> wrote:

> Scanning for viruses is completely different than scanning for
> user information.

both look at the content.

> There are in fact "people in a back room reading emails".

there are not.

> https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/2/17527972/gmail-app-developers-full-email-acc
> ess
>

Google told The Verge that it only gives data to vetted third-party
developers and with users¹ explicit consent.
...
Google employees may also read emails but only in ³very specific
cases where you ask us to and give consent, or where we need to
for security purposes, such as investigating a bug or abuse,² the
company stated to the WSJ.

note the part 'with consent'.

[Piet]

[Piet]

(oops, previous "reply" escaped accidentally)

Carlos E.R. wrote:

> Paul wrote:
>> https://policies.google.com/terms?hl=en
>> "Our automated systems analyze your content (including emails) <===
>> to provide you personally relevant product features,
>> such as customized search results,
>> tailored advertising, <===
>> and spam and malware detection.
>> This analysis occurs as the content is
>> sent, received, and when it is stored.
>> "
>>

>> If they could scan the air you're breathing, they would.
>
> Thanks, you saved me the effort :-D

The effort of breathing? :-)

Note that breathed air also falls under Google's terms.
After all it's "your content", though transient.

-p

[Carlos E.R.]

On 19/05/2019 03.02, John Doe wrote:
> The language was added to Google's user agreement in 2014.
> Under pressure from lawsuits.
>
> Microsoft started a campaign against Google for reading its
> customers emails, so obviously Microsoft does not do it.
>
> Stop spewing nonsense, point to the language in any other email
> provider's user agreement...
>

LOL

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 19/05/2019 02.42, John Doe wrote:
> If there were nothing unusual about the practice of reading
> customers' emails, other email providers would do it. But they
> don't. Microsoft doesn't. There are some ads in Hotmail, or you can
> pay for the service.
>
> It's a SHOCKING practice. Government is not even allowed to read our
> emails, without a court order. At least here in the United States,
> no one is allowed to monitor customer communications without a court
> order. Not the mail service and not the telephone service. It should
> be no different for email. Sooner or later Google will get in
> trouble for abusing it.
>
> A Google fanboy from Spain...
>

LOL

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

The difference is that it is machines who read the mails, not persons,
thus it is legal. Machines do not need a court order, even less when the
user signed an agreement that clearly said the mail would be scanned.

You are right, any antispam system reads the email.

Now, when some google developers read email (possibly to develop the
programming that will do the "reading"), that's suspicious.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 19/05/2019 02.56, John Doe wrote:
> That the poster can find citations about the unethical practice is
> not surprising. My question was about the user agreement. Whether
> the poster knew about the unethical practice, only the Shadow knows.
> And it still did not provide a Google "announcement" of the
> practice.
>
> The fact Google had to add language to its user agreement in 2014 is
> telling. It was under pressure from lawsuits against the unethical
> practice of reading its customers' emails.
>
> This post is from a Spanish Google fanboy (perhaps an employee of
> Google)...

LOL.

>


--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 19/05/2019 02.44, John Doe wrote:
> No, Google did not "tell it from day one". In fact, they had to add
> language in 2014 to avoid lawsuits.
>
> Microsoft does not read their customers emails. Problem is, this
> poster comes from a country that isn't used to freedom we have here
> in the United States...
>

LOL

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Shadow]

On Sun, 19 May 2019 00:56:36 -0000 (UTC), John Doe
<alway...@message.header> wrote:

>That the poster can find citations about the unethical practice is
>not surprising. My question was about the user agreement. Whether
>the poster knew about the unethical practice, only the Shadow knows.
>And it still did not provide a Google "announcement" of the
>practice.

"It" did. See my sig.

//11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold
in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the
Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give
Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and
non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate,
publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any
Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the
Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google
..... //

.... to sell your data to any interested parties (including
oppressive governments) at the highest bidder.
At least they're honest about it.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

[nospam]

In article <r4q7rf-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> >> It's a SHOCKING practice. Government is not even allowed to read our
> >> emails, without a court order. At least here in the United States,
> >> no one is allowed to monitor customer communications without a court
> >> order. Not the mail service and not the telephone service. It should
> >> be no different for email. Sooner or later Google will get in
> >> trouble for abusing it.
> >
> > false. law enforcement generally can't without a warrant, but others
> > can, which is partly how spam filtering works.
> >
>
> The difference is that it is machines who read the mails, not persons,
> thus it is legal. Machines do not need a court order, even less when the
> user signed an agreement that clearly said the mail would be scanned.

correct.

> You are right, any antispam system reads the email.
>
> Now, when some google developers read email (possibly to develop the
> programming that will do the "reading"), that's suspicious.

they do not need access to user content to develop machine learning
algorithms.

[Arlen G. Holder]

Do others get completely different results when using these methods?
1. WEB BASED SEARCH QUERY label:^smartlabel_receipt
2. <https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sun, 19 May 2019 02:40:46 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> Just modified. It was there since ever.

On Sat, 18 May 2019 22:31:16 -0400, Clare Snyder wrote:

> OK - I did NOT know about this SPECIFIC cache -

Hi Clare,
THANK YOU for being honest.
o To your credit, you can see both sides of the coin.

Very few people on Usenet would admit what you did
o Nor would they _dig deeper_ for facts - as you did.

That you did both those things, is a testament to two things
o Your inteligence
o Your credibility

You are like me - where you _care_ about your credibility.

I simply _knew_ you didn't know about this specific cache.
o Only because _nobody_ knew about this specific cache.

That's why it's making the news.

The "problem" is that the facts don't fit the narrative.
o Google "says" this is to "help you keep track" of your receipts
But...
o Google never _told_ you about this specific cache.

That is a fact which seems to be true - right?
o So the fact does NOT fit the narrative.

That always bugs me (sort of like how the Gulf of Tonkin incident facts
didn't fit the narrative).

> but I DID know they
> cache and harvest VIRTUALLY EVERTHING they think they might make a
> pedo on - and they DO NOT publicize it - and they DO NOT make it easy
> - if it is possible at all - to prevent theirclandistine data
> collection.

Clare,
EVERYONE knows that Google tracks almost everything you do in Gmail.
o <https://policies.google.com/privacy>

That's NOT what this thread is about
o That wouldn't be "news" for example.

> After doing a bit of research (you DO know what that is, right??)

Clare,
I respect you for your knowledge, and even more that you admitted you
didn't know about this URL, which, while it's patently obvious that NOBODY
knew, you, at least, had the courage to admit that you didn't know it (even
though I _knew_ you didn't know it 'cuz I'm a logical rational person).

NOTE: Since Usenet is a casual medium, when I say "NOBODY", it's patently
accepted that this means "Almost Nobody", as people at Google certainly
knew.

However ... if you knew what my PhD is in, and from what school, and then
if you knew how many papers I've written, you wouldn't make that silly
childish taunt that I don't know what "research" is.

I'm not going to point out my papers, nor send you a copy of my degrees,
but rest assured I know how to do research in the formal sense.

So please don't play that game with me Clare, as there's likely almost
nobody on this ng who has more education than I do (plenty will have as
much, but very few will have more) so let's not go there again please.

For example, I already reported on the following, which dilutes my
narrative mind you, but like any scientist or engineer, I am beholden to
the truth and not to any particular interpretation of that truth.

Google _did_ mention, way back in 2013, that you could put this search term
in your Gmail search box, which is kind of sort of similar to the new
secret URL that we found out from the recent news reports::
label:^smartlabel_receipt

It's not the same thing, of course, but it's a step in that direction:
<https://www.itworld.com/article/2711018/find-all-your-receipts-in-gmail-automatically.html>

> This move started in 2013 - and it was partly a move by Google to
> make it difficult for anyone else to "harvest" the information - if
> they want the information they have to buy it from Google.

Clare - that's a rational reasonable point, which I don't disagree with.
o Facts are easy for people who are rational to agree with.

> There is
> information about it on hubspot (Originally published Dec 13, 2013
> 10:07:00 AM, updated July 28 2017) at
> https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/google-gmail-images-email-marketers-nj

Thanks for that link, Clare, where, as you know, I read every reference
that people post in helpful responses to queries.
o How Google's Change to Gmail Images Affects Email Marketers
<https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/google-gmail-images-email-marketers-nj>
"When recipients choose to load an image, they share a lot of information
about themselves, including their location and the kind of device they're
using. Marketers also learn, of course, that someone has opened their
email."

Notice that the images now come from Google instead of the sender:

"But now, Google is going to cache all these images itself. So when a
recipient loads an image, it will come from Google, not from the marketer."

Notice that Google actually _changes_ the email content:

"when a Gmail recipient opens an email, Google will have re-written the
email content to source any images from them. "

> They explain it as a way to display images inline in their webmail
> app.
> more info at
> https://litmus.com/blog/gmail-adds-image-caching-what-you-need-to-know.
> and
> https://litmus.com/blog/gmail-adds-image-caching-what-you-need-to-know

Both those URLs were the same:

From your prior article reference, we can summarize as "old" and "new"
styles of image processing:
(NOTE: I could be wrong but this is my take on the old/new process.)

OLD:
o Marketeer mails you the email containing a _unique_ image link
o You ignore that email & marketeer knows the link wasn't clicked
o Marketeer doesn't know if you opened the email though

If you _click_ on the image link, the Marketeer learns more:
o Marketeer knows you clicked on the image link
o But also - Marketeer gets information about your software

NEW:
o Marketeer mails you the email containing a _unique_ image link
o You ignore that email & marketeer knows you ignored that email!
o If you open the email, marketeer also knows you opened it.

WHY:
o Google re-wrote the email to link to a Google server instead
o The Google server asks for the unique link from the marketeer
o So the marketeer _only_ knows that you opened the email

Notice your URL below says this only works for WEB access to Gmail, so we
can presume that, oh, say, Thunderbird, might work differently.
o DECEMBER 9, 2013 What You Need To Know About Image Caching In Gmail
<https://litmus.com/blog/gmail-adds-image-caching-what-you-need-to-know>

There is also some question in my mind as to how "unique" the image link is
crafted, where, for example, these could all point, in the end, to the same
image, even as the link is unique to each person:
o http://domain.com/linktoperson1/image.jpg
o http://domain.com/linktoperson2/image.jpg
And
o http://domain.com/images/image1.jpg
o http://domain.com/images/image2.jpg
Where the web software effectively uses an automated symbolic-link (in
effect) where both image1.jpg and image2.jpg are actually "image.jpg".

If my assessment above is wrong, someone smarter will let me know. :)

> It appears from this information that using something like MICROSOFT
> OFFICE OUTLOOK as your mail client MAY solve the problem, as it
> APPEARS the caching is done by the browser app (webmail).

Thanks for that information that each MUA may handle the image links
differently that Google re-writes, where your latter article inferred the
same thing by saying:
"Gmail has started caching images for users accessing Gmail via the
webmail interface: images are viewed only once on the original server while
successive views will originate from the cached image on Google¢s proxy
servers."

What's interesting about that comment is that the re-writing of your email
apparently occurs "on the fly" as you download the email from the IMAP
server to your device - which is the ONLY time that Google "can" know that
you're using a web-based interface.

Presumably, if you use, oh, say Outlook or Thunderbird as your MUA, then
the re-writing of the image link doesn't happen. ???

In summary Clare, I APPRECIATE your honesty, which bolsters your
credibility, since you, like me, speak facts and you look up those facts.

For my part, I _read_ your links, and summarized them, again, because I
care about my credibility so if I'm wrong, someone smarter than I am will
certainly let me know. :)

Still, I must point out that this image caching sub thread is interesting,
but I don't see it related to the fact that Google is secretly (apparently)
creating a web page of your free stuff, registration, and paid stuff (at
least), which Google _says_ is for you to use - but which is located at a
secret place that Google never told anyone about (as far as anyone yet can
tell).

That's why it's news.

The solution is what we're after here, which, may be:
o Switch to Proton Mail (or equivalent), or,
o Delete your receipts, or,
o Convert your receipts into non-scannable emails.

Any other viable solutions that intelligent people can propose?

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sat, 18 May 2019 19:15:55 -0600, rbowman wrote:

> https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/17/18629789/google-purchase-history-gmail-email-receipts
>
> https://policies.google.com/privacy?hl=en
>
> The second link is from January 22, 2019. You can click on 'Archived
> Versions' that go back to 9 June 1999. You can usually find a link to
> the privacy policy by rooting around in your account information.
>
> Do they provide a handy link on the front page? Hell no. Does Aunt Mary
> religiously read TechCrunch, BetaNews, TheRegister, TheHackerNews, and
> other sites that report on doings in the IT world? Hell no. Does she
> know Zuckerberg looks at her as a cash cow? Hell no.

Hi rbowman,

Facts first; only then can rational logic ensue.

THANK YOU for this useful information!
o You are adding value to the potluck picnic to share with everyone.

I will read your cites, as my main point is twofold in this thread:
1. Initially: Inform users of this tool & find ways to ameliorate it
2. Currently: Agree with or Correct those who feel Google told us all along

The one thing about me is that all I care about are the actual facts.
o I will _modify_ my belief system (if necessary) based on the facts.

I'm allergic to bullshit from people who say they knew about this all along
o And yet, they almost certainly did not (yet they bullshit us anyway)

It's why I don't have an imaginary belief system.
o Hence I _appreciate_ the facts you brought up.

Hence I read your facts with hopeful scientific ardor.
o Specifically _what_ and _when_ Google "told us" about this.

Here's The Verge article you referenced:
o May 17, 2019: Google has been tracking nearly everything you buy online ĄX see for yourself with this tool
<https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/17/18629789/google-purchase-history-gmail-email-receipts>
"Google has been quietly keeping track of nearly every single online
purchase youĄŚve ever made, thanks to purchase receipts sent to your
personal Gmail account, according to a new report today from CNBC. Even
stranger: this information is made available to you via a private web tool
thatĄŚs been active for an indeterminate amount of time."
"Google did not say how long this tool has been active. "
"this tool, and the technology to collect and present the data it
provides, has existed quietly without a majority of Gmail users aware"
"google claims this difficult to find, hard to delete itemization of my
entire purchasing history is to "help me keep track of all my shopping
habits in one place, total BS. it's to help google keep track of all my
shopping habits in one place."

Bear in mind that, while the article mentioned this site tracks receipts,
even Apple receipts, it did not mention the fact that it tracked my "free"
stuff, such as a free electronic device shipped to me from my carrier, and
detailed mandatory government registration information for some things.

I'm too old to run this test to register for the draft, but if there are
any 18 year old born male people on this newsgroup, it would be interesting
to know if they also archived your mandatory selective service registration
receipt.

And anyone who points to the Google privacy policy is missing the point
since I'm not asking whether Google tracks us (they do); and I'm not asking
whether Google "said" they'd track us any way they could (they do)...

Facts first; then rational logic can ensue.

The twitter post in the The Verge article summed up the honest issue well:
a. If Google really wanted us to use this to "keep track" of our receipts
b. Why isn't this special web page listed _anywhere_ that anyone can find?

The logic doesn't fit the facts. (not yet anyway)

[John McGaw]

#1 shows nothing but tells me that there are results in spam/deleted --
these are all UPS shipping/delivery notifications

#2 shows nothing

[Carlos E.R.]

On 19/05/2019 20.16, Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> I'm allergic to bullshit from people who say they knew about this all along
> o And yet, they almost certainly did not (yet they bullshit us anyway)

You can believe what you wish and insult me at large if that makes you
happier. I knew that google was collecting receipts since about two
year. And that they scan and read my email since ever. I did read the
term and conditions in full with my first google account - and at that
time, it was an experiment, you got one by invitation. You may google me
and find how I warned people against gmail "because they read your
emails" more than a decade ago.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[John McWilliams]

OK

[John McWilliams]

It shows a lot of x posting.

[Dan Purgert]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

I've worked in "email admin" before (well, more being the gofer for the
admin when he was busy doing whatever massaging of Exchange was
necessary).

It's surprising how many people in a corporate environment think that
their (corporate) emails are private, and get all bent out of shape when
they find out that is false.

"It's right there in the employee handbook that you didn't read..."


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAlzijV8ACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooG2rwgAhSTgaA3XrAMFzDnydIOYovWiV6Z9Xfb8joW/rWRCC3vGBIVmpJu4tMZG
qTSGJHYWT2SC8UBGumKe/2OXgyWZLGcnnOhhCE5umZOS613DvUFyAzcr7UjHnQKR
mr9vJ1+k0v3h6xPMq3RPEz15NxGPCTSFrWGsSuizz9/eATsI9THNCn/DoF2kD8cn
vycVMLoMkMnKal5eXGq5fk+KeWDkHI68QRQRs7pddjqU2vwz7tuTXKf+zQTtU7dc
AfO01m0SRtAe2+OTyRSE0iZ4MeJLy+sGQrkRNAsUmyfc2J1nmDJAU+EqkWTLTB0C
paOIUfMauQJJx1KpMhrHtLwZZFQLJw==
=mKEi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_|
|_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

[she...@outlook.com]

Why are we still feeding Mr. Holden?

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Mon, 20 May 2019 00:42:45 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> You can believe what you wish and insult me at large if that makes you
> happier. I knew that google was collecting receipts since about two
> year. And that they scan and read my email since ever. I did read the
> term and conditions in full with my first google account - and at that
> time, it was an experiment, you got one by invitation. You may google me
> and find how I warned people against gmail "because they read your
> emails" more than a decade ago.

Hi Carlos,

Please try to ADD (on topic technical) VALUE in your next post Carlos

You can "claim" (like Diesel always claims) that you know everything
o But you failed (and he always fails) the simplest of sanity checks

That's OK ... as I _knew_ you'd fail
o Your claim was bullshit because NOBODY knew (outside of Google).

The fact is that you both just make up your omnipotence
o That's OK - lots of people bullshit all the time, Carlos.

If you knew, then you'd actually disprove my point
o Where I'm _never_ afraid of facts Carlos.

You just happen do bullshit more than most people do, Carlos.

If Google told you, then you'll be able to _find_ that URL online
o <https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>

Claire, to his credit, _admitted_ he was just speaking about general stuff
when he claimed to have _known_ about this _secret_ location.

The reason it matters is that Google claims that this location is designed
to make it "easier for users to track purchases", and yet, according to all
factual accounts (i.e., not bullshit), NOBODY knew about this URL.

The point is that the google narrative doesn't hold water
o It's just not a logical argument that a _secret_ URL is to help us

I completely understand all your bullshit Carlos that Google "tracks stuff"
o You and nospam should get a room together for your bullshit arguments

Everyone knows Google tracks stuff - this isn't about that

This thread has multiple purposes:
1. Inform users of this previously secret URL (success)
2. Ask users to let us know what type of receipts it catches (partial fail)
3. Figure out a way around this and still have functional email (fail)

Interestingly, most people didn't add any value to this thread, albeit some
did. Most of the bullshitters, for example, claimed imaginary omnipotence.

You and nospam claiming you know everything, when NOBODY knew about this
o Doesn't help

Neither does this response to you.
o Please try to ADD (on topic technical) VALUE in your next post Carlos

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Sun, 19 May 2019 15:35:08 -0400, John McGaw wrote:

> #1 shows nothing but tells me that there are results in spam/deleted --
> these are all UPS shipping/delivery notifications
>
> #2 shows nothing

Thanks for adding value to the Usenet poluck picnic
o Everyone adds as much on-topic technical value as they can

I get tons from the label query, but not much from the Google secret URL.
o So my value added is to claim that the two searches are _different_

To further the value - the answer to this question would help:
*Does anyone here have a list of those secret Google search labels?*

Usenet is a potluck where each person proves their added value.
o Witness those who post bullshit who can't ever add any value

Since we've accomplished our initial goal of informing people, and we've
ascertained nobody knew (except the bullshitters) of this secret URL,
we should strive in each post to ADD VALUE (like you did, John McGaw).

One way someone can ADD ON-TOPIC TECHNICAL VALUE is to provide a LIST of
all those secret "labels" that Google seems to automatically tag our email
with.

I know of these searches, but they're for USER labels (not Google labels)
o -has:userlabels
o has:nouserlabels

*Does anyone here have a list of those secret Google search labels?*

[John McWilliams]

On 5/20/19 PDT 4:56 AM, she...@outlook.com wrote:
> Why are we still feeding Mr. Holden?
>

?

[John McWilliams]

No.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 20/05/2019 19.13, Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> On Mon, 20 May 2019 00:42:45 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>> You can believe what you wish and insult me at large if that makes you
>> happier. I knew that google was collecting receipts since about two
>> year. And that they scan and read my email since ever. I did read the
>> term and conditions in full with my first google account - and at that
>> time, it was an experiment, you got one by invitation. You may google me
>> and find how I warned people against gmail "because they read your
>> emails" more than a decade ago.
>
> Hi Carlos,
>
> Please try to ADD (on topic technical) VALUE in your next post Carlos

Who are you to judge the value of what I say?

>
> You can "claim" (like Diesel always claims) that you know everything

I never claimed such a thing.

> o But you failed (and he always fails) the simplest of sanity checks
>
> That's OK ... as I _knew_ you'd fail
> o Your claim was bullshit because NOBODY knew (outside of Google).

We proved with links that it was published. You are welcome to come to
my city with a truth machine and verify that I don't lie when I say I knew.

Snipping the rest of this stupid post of yours.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[she...@outlook.com]

Mr. Holden is, in my opinion, a self-proclaimed android OS "expert" who has
a track record of asking for a solution for a problem, then refuses to use
the suggested "solutions" because they do not fit his need, IMHO. He's only
had about 600 postings using twu nyms in the last 60 days.
He's not worth my time, but it can be enterrtaining to a point.

[she...@outlook.com]

As far as the Gmail keeping receipts "issue", don't u GMail. Use a separate
throwayay address for the specific use these receipts.

[The Real Bev]

On 05/18/2019 09:16 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 05/18/2019 08:42 AM, Arlen G. Holder wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 May 2019 21:48:17 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
>>
>>> I have none in either account that I use for shopping.
>>> Which purchases are being tracked?
> <snip>
>> Back to the Google tracking of all your purchase receipts in your email,
>> I don't see any way to turn it off or "Pause" it, in Google parlance:
>> <https://myaccount.google.com/data-and-personalization>
>>
>> The _only_ way I know to stop it is to delete your email as shown below
>> with this Motorola Moto-G bought as a gift phone years ago:
>> <https://i.postimg.cc/vTXjyRGR/purchase01.jpg>
>>
>> If I have this much, I can imagine what someone has who buys stuff online
>> frequently - where - anything online - is just waiting to be hacked.
>>
>> Given that, I don't see yet how _turning it off_ is possible.
>> o Do you?
>
> Not a clue, but I looked again. My accounts are empty, but hubby's
> account has one entry going back over a year ago. He wouldn't have done
> anything in his account, which he only accesses using 'nail' (linux
> text-only).
>
> I normally do all the on-line shopping, but he must have ordered that
> thing while I was gone. I've never done anything to block anything at
> the gmail site, I rely on Thunderbird to deal with spam. Unfortunately
> every once in a while it decides that real mail from friends and
> relatives is spam and puts it in the junk folder. Retraining doesn't
> help. This is why I don't delete it automatically.

It only saves 'purchases' with receipts that are still at the website.

I delete mail in the account I generally use to buy stuff automatically
as soon as I've downloaded it. There are no purchases there. In the
other account I leave it at the gmail website until I go to the site and
delete everything I've received up to that point -- somewhere between
300 and 3000 depending on how lazy I am. I regard that mail as
important, so I keep 'backups' until I feel like cleaning house. That
account contains only a new amazon receipt -- I cleared out my inbox a
week or so ago.

--
Cheers, Bev
"This software is as user-friendly as a cornered rat!"

[xJumper]

The question to me is why the hell does anyone use free webmail, whether
from Google or Microsoft when there are many cheap paid email service
providers that do not sell your information. Like is your
information/privacy not worth $20 a year? That's less than a dollar a
day, surely you buy more stupid shit than that in a year.

If anything you SAVE money by PAYING for email...

Email isn't free, it costs Google money just like the paid email
providers to host your email. If paid email services average $20-30/yr
then we can assume Google probably incurs a similar cost per member.
Which also means that as a profit generating company they likely regain
MORE than $20-$30 per member in advertisement revenue with figures that
support the claims they make to advertisers indicating that each member
has bought XYZ products valued at or above those figures. If anything
you lose money by opting not to pay for email.


And this idea that Google, Microsoft and/or the US Government doesn't
read your emails.... LOL

Google/Microsoft have been caught repeatedly breaking agreements such as
the GDPR and violating privacy laws. The U.S. government routinely
violates civil rights both in real life and the digital space. They are
tapped into tier one internet backbones illegally siphoning off data,
e.g. AT&T room 641A, etc...

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Mon, 20 May 2019 16:36:55 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:

> It only saves 'purchases' with receipts that are still at the website.

Hi The Real Bev,

Thank you for describing a solution, which is to delete (or modify) all
email that contains what Google might consider a "receipt" (which, we must
note, clearly includes mandatory government registrations & free stuff).

Since Usenet is a potluck where everyone proves their value solely by what
information they bring to the table that is of use to others, I, for one,
appreciate your confirmation of that possible solution.

In addition, particularly since I am not like most people here who seem to
duplicitously _hide_ the facts, I present the facts as I know them -
because I'm not beholden to any particular narrative - but to the truth.

To that end, this post on the home-repair group fundamentally changes the
narrative ...

On Mon, 20 May 2019 16:03:33 -0400, Clare Snyder wrote:

> I SUSPECT it has something to do with their Google Analytics Tag
> Manager function, but I am not sure. This is part of their enhanced
> ecomerce app.

Hi Clare,

THANK YOU for finding those links!
o Your research _completely_ changes the narrative (in some ways)

And that's OK.
o Our goal, always, is the facts - where the narrative changes with facts!

Just as I changed my idea about triple-checking dynamic balance after I was
informed that Costco does that triple-check for five bucks, I will modify
my belief system based on the new facts you just helpfully presented.

Starting with that Reddit post you unearthed, you showed "SOMEONE" knew:
o Google is tracking all of my online purchases
<https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/90wpx2/google_is_tracking_all_of_my_online_purchases/>

It does NOT seem to be in the temporarl news, e.g., this 2017
o "Top 7 Links That Will Tell You How Much Google Knows About You"
<https://mobiviki.com/2017/01/01/top-7-links-will-tell-much-google-knows/>

But then there is that obscure 2017 MIT Technology Review article you
unearthed, which I thank you for locating, which explains the intent:
o "Google Now Tracks Your Credit Card Purchases and Connects Them to Its Online Profile of You The search giant wants to know how online ads translate into offline sales"
<https://www.technologyreview.com/s/607938/google-now-tracks-your-credit-card-purchases-and-connects-them-to-its-online-profile-of-you/>
"The capability, which Google unveiled this week, allows the company to
connect the dots between the ads that it shows its users and what they end
up actually buying."

As you noted, that article was partly based on this 2017 Google sales pitch
to advertisers (which further explains the intent):
o "Powering ads and analytics innovations with machine learning"
<https://adwords.googleblog.com/2017/05/powering-ads-and-analytics-innovations.html>
" And even if your business doesn┤ have a large loyalty program, you can
still measure store sales by taking advantage of Google┬ third-party
partnerships, which capture approximately 70% of credit and debit card
transactions in the United States."

As an aside, the MIT article referenced the concept of "Surveillance
Capitalism", pointing to this abstract:
o "Big Other: Surveillance Capitalism and the Prospects of an Information Civilization"
<https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2594754>

And, as you noted, there's evidence this "was" discussed prior.
o Dated today: Google uses Gmail to track everything you buy online
<https://www.zdnet.com/article/google-uses-gmail-to-track-everything-you-buy-online/>
"Google's purchase history page was brought to public attention in a CNBC
report, though it's been there for at least year as part of a Google
Assistant feature update. "

BINGO!
o That's where it was originally reported (as far as anyone can tell)!
<https://www.androidpolice.com/2018/03/19/google-assistant-gets-dedicated-purchases-page/>

That's still NOT from Google - directly - but at least it was "known" by
"someone" at least a year ago.

So now, the question morphs, as do all scientific questions as new data
rolls in (except climate science, which already has proclaimed the final
solution before the facts were ever in), to why doesn't the news media (or
me) KNOW about this since it's (clearly?) been there (all along?) right
there in our Google web mail!!!!!!

1. Go to Google mail using a web browser
2. At top right click on your avatar circle
3. Click on the blue "Google Account" rectangle
4. At left, click in "Payments & Subscriptions"
5. At right, look under "Purchases"
6. Then click on "Manage purchases"
Voila!

Based on the evidence of the Android Central article, I don't think Google
pulled an Apple move (where Tim Cook got caught lying that they published
the throttling in the release notes when they actually were found to have
quietly modified the release notes well after the release) - so - it seems
even as nobody yet has found a Google announcement - SOMEONE knew about
this - which damages the narrative that Google was being sinister, I agree.

Since I do NOT cherry pick my data - I present all that I know - because
I'm not beholden to convincing you of anything that isn't known fact.

Clearly very few people knew - but - the fact is ... it was there ...
o Thank you Clare for unearthing this useful historical information!

I respect you more, now, than ever, since you seem to be an honest upfront
forthright intelligent non-bullshitting person who cares about your
credibility - as am I and as do I.

[G-Man shill]

On Mon, 20 May 2019 20:21:30 -0400, xJumper <suga...@mailinator.com>
wrote:

>tapped into tier one internet backbones illegally siphoning off data

Bloody Chinese bots. They are everywhere.

Stay alert citizens and remember

Hay Way is the NME

Hay Way is an arch key

Take this man's name Sergeant!

[Dusty Bin]

*FORGERY BY POOH*

--
Ectoplasm, because it makes me think about beating my bishop.

[Spit the Cat]

On Tue, 21 May 2019 01:41:05 +0100, Dusty Bin <MeM...@privacy.net>
wrote:

>On Tue, 21 May 2019 01:39:37 +0100, "G-Man shill"
><super...@nonfluffyunderbelly.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 20 May 2019 20:21:30 -0400, xJumper <suga...@mailinator.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>tapped into tier one internet backbones illegally siphoning off data
>>
>>Bloody Chinese bots. They are everywhere.
>>
>>Stay alert citizens and remember
>>
>>Hay Way is the NME
>>
>>Hay Way is an arch key
>>
>>Take this man's name Sergeant!
>
>*FORGERY BY POOH*

You're a creep and a snitch Dusty.

--
Spit the cat
Duddit's only lives if you feed him through a straw

[John Doe]

The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It only saves 'purchases' with receipts that are still at the
> website.
>
> I delete mail in the account I generally use to buy stuff
> automatically as soon as I've downloaded it. There are no
> purchases there. In the other account I leave it at the gmail
> website until I go to the site and delete everything I've received
> up to that point -- somewhere between 300 and 3000 depending on
> how lazy I am. I regard that mail as important, so I keep
> 'backups' until I feel like cleaning house. That account contains
> only a new amazon receipt -- I cleared out my inbox a week or so
> ago.

"You don't have any mail! Our servers are feeling unloved."

[The Real Bev]

On 05/20/2019 05:22 PM, Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> On Mon, 20 May 2019 16:36:55 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
>
>> It only saves 'purchases' with receipts that are still at the website.
>
> Hi The Real Bev,
>
> Thank you for describing a solution, which is to delete (or modify) all
> email that contains what Google might consider a "receipt" (which, we must
> note, clearly includes mandatory government registrations & free stuff).

I don't understand why people leave their email in the cloud. I assume
that google (and everyone else) saves everything that passes through its
fingers, but we really shouldn't make it any easier for them or anyone
else to rummage through what ought to be our personal correspondence.

--
Cheers, Bev
Judges are our only protection against a legal system that can
afford lots more prosecution than we can afford defense.

[nospam]

In article <qbvhqv$70l$3...@dont-email.me>, The Real Bev

<bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't understand why people leave their email in the cloud.

being able to access it from multiple devices at any time, anywhere.

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Mon, 20 May 2019 17:47:26 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:

> I don't understand why people leave their email in the cloud. I assume
> that google (and everyone else) saves everything that passes through its
> fingers, but we really shouldn't make it any easier for them or anyone
> else to rummage through what ought to be our personal correspondence.

Hi The Real Bev,

I understand your concern, where, in the olden days, we all used POP3,
which worked fine (for the most part, and from the main desktop which we
used to access our email).

With the advent of multiple entry points, the IMAP4 model became prevalent,
where I'm not sure at what point we all just started leaving our mail on
the server, but we got lazy at some point, which, I'm sure, has been the
doom of many who have been hacked.

As for government access, I think, but I'm not sure, there was a magical
30-day time period, as I recall, at which point "communications" became
"storage".

We could look up the details, where it would be nice to have an update on
what the USA legal limit is, or, for other countries, what the facts are
for when email transitions between the more protected "communications" to
the far less protected "storage" designation.

[John Doe]

The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It only saves 'purchases' with receipts that are still at the website.

Which website?

> I delete mail in the account

I deleted all Google email. But there is still stuff at the "purchases"
link.

<https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Tue, 21 May 2019 00:43:42 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> We proved with links that it was published. You are welcome to come to
> my city with a truth machine and verify that I don't lie when I say I knew.

Hi Carlos,

Usenet is a potluck - where everyone proves their value by what they bring
to share with the others - where I bring facts - and rational belief
systems.

It does nobody any good to bring bullshit & imaginary belief systems to the
potluck, to share, because only the morons (like shemp) will eat it up with
glee.

Since facts and rational non-imaginary belief systems add value to
Usenet...

If you want to speak facts that add value to the potluck, then simply
answer the apropos question where I asked you to please clarify what
functionality you claimed you can't do on unrooted Android without a Google
account that I apparently can do just fine without a Google account on my
unrooted Android phone:

o Is there any free FUNCTIONALITY that you need to do on Android, that you can't do WITHOUT a Google Account?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/xzaii4eUY_E/WeY-r7_OAAAJ>

[xJumper]

Must be missing some kind of inside joke, cause the top three posters
make no sense.

[Percival P. Cassidy]

On 5/18/19 12:34 AM, Arlen G. Holder wrote:

> Google keeps a log of all digital receipts emailed to your GMail account.
>
> It's a permanent log of digital and physical things you've bought that
> Google's automated scans picked up from receipts sent to your Gmail inbox.
>
> It's apparently located at:
> <https://myaccount.google.com/purchases>
>
> And, it's not easy to get rid of the data, at least not en masse.
> <https://www.engadget.com/2015/06/01/google-privacy-security-hub/>
>
> Nor could I find _any_ way to turn it off, even after looking here:
> <https://myaccount.google.com/data-and-personalization>
>
> Other than inevitable childish jokes about not using Gmail, or silly
> suggestions about not having emails with receipts, do you know of any way
> to turn this receipt tracking off that I missed?

I checked it out: it's a collection of links to your emailed order
confirmations and receipts that were sent to your gmail address. If you
delete them at https://myaccount.google.com/purchases, you're deleting
the original emails.

I have little doubt that other "free" email services do the same: if
it's "free", you and your information are the product from which the
company makes money.

Perce

[Mayayana]

"The Real Bev" <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote

|

| I don't understand why people leave their email in the cloud. I assume
| that google (and everyone else) saves everything that passes through its
| fingers, but we really shouldn't make it any easier for them or anyone
| else to rummage through what ought to be our personal correspondence.
|

Yes, but if you use gmail you don't have an option
to delete it. You can only delete your access.
I think the main reason people leave it is because
they want access from different locations. Also, many
people just can't be bothered to manage their own
backup. Personally I use POP3 with my own domain host
and set it to delete from the server after download.

[The Real Bev]

On 05/20/2019 06:11 PM, Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> On Mon, 20 May 2019 17:47:26 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
>
>> I don't understand why people leave their email in the cloud. I assume
>> that google (and everyone else) saves everything that passes through its
>> fingers, but we really shouldn't make it any easier for them or anyone
>> else to rummage through what ought to be our personal correspondence.
>
> Hi The Real Bev,
>
> I understand your concern, where, in the olden days, we all used POP3,
> which worked fine (for the most part, and from the main desktop which we
> used to access our email).

I have one of my gmail accounts set as both POP3 and IMAP. I think I
wanted my important email to be downloaded to my computer even if I read
it on my laptop (POP won't allow you to do that -- you have to disable
POP and re-enable it, and then make sure you don't download email that
you've already downloaded). Or something.

I think our email is viewable by anybody who wants to see it if they
have the skill. Like our credit and medical info. Four options:

1. We don't care.
2. We assume nobody cares enough to snoop.
3. We do a lot of security stuff that we hope will work.
4. We don't use the internet.


--
Cheers, Bev
"Too many people in Washington are full of themselves, among
other things that they are full of." --Thomas Sowell

[Dan Purgert]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

So, IMAP and a VPS you own then?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAlzj2MEACgkQjhHd8xJ5
ooGhaggAg8MzXBB5YdA8+vggCjrCLCgf03T2ZWn6gTZLz8vZ1ttL/qcOSxHB4whq
vZypvLIkgCqDV903oDmgW4qwHYIyMXqF4/wdArXkhSG95KjfTMefvsexsv5u2a9Y
lXHkzHBPnucIR8+g9ynKyJ+K7ynumxiICvmJuxI6mP5Tv8lPWi+18CLJOlj2HCvr
phwBBnkxK+g7tNX3cQiuz3RYLHwcjnohD7JIOKwgCsAAvYIaxBmhEQIR/ShuGXNp
HNeJOSyvsPxEG4fMqjeOcYvuXrZhVX4fHuY++avOERmK6gHzqqfcaeJUfcWpQZRT
/fkjKJ/ITf5p0LZAzITDb6sIDcZVuQ==
=aZVJ

[Carlos E.R.]

On 21/05/2019 03.18, Arlen G. Holder wrote:
> On Tue, 21 May 2019 00:43:42 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>> We proved with links that it was published. You are welcome to come to
>> my city with a truth machine and verify that I don't lie when I say I knew.
>
> Hi Carlos,
>
> Usenet is a potluck - where everyone proves their value by what they bring
> to share with the others - where I bring facts - and rational belief
> systems.
>
> It does nobody any good to bring bullshit & imaginary belief systems to the
> potluck, to share, because only the morons (like shemp) will eat it up with
> glee.

I stated facts, to which you respond with childish rants and insults.

Enough.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 21/05/2019 03.18, Arlen G. Holder wrote:

> On Tue, 21 May 2019 00:43:42 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
>> We proved with links that it was published. You are welcome to come to
>> my city with a truth machine and verify that I don't lie when I say I knew.
>
> Hi Carlos,
>
> Usenet is a potluck - where everyone proves their value by what they bring
> to share with the others - where I bring facts - and rational belief
> systems.

Who are you to judge my facts are not facts?

>
> It does nobody any good to bring bullshit & imaginary belief systems to the
> potluck, to share, because only the morons (like shemp) will eat it up with
> glee.
>
> Since facts and rational non-imaginary belief systems add value to
> Usenet...
>
> If you want to speak facts that add value to the potluck, then simply
> answer the apropos question where I asked you to please clarify what
> functionality you claimed you can't do on unrooted Android without a Google
> account that I apparently can do just fine without a Google account on my
> unrooted Android phone:

We are not talking of that here. Wrong thread.

> o Is there any free FUNCTIONALITY that you need to do on Android, that you can't do WITHOUT a Google Account?
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/xzaii4eUY_E/WeY-r7_OAAAJ>
>

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Frank Slootweg]

It would be interesting if you would click on the '(i)' icon of one
of those purchases and then do -> Where's this from -> VIEW EMAIL.

For me, it shows the email from which Google deduced the purchase.

But what does it show for you, when you've deleted said email?

[N.B. I have a Gmail address, which I only use for purchases and other
commercial activity, and that indeed shows this kind of purchases. The
Gmail account tied to my Android devices shows only Google Play
purchases, no non-Google purchases.]

[Arlen G. Holder]

On Tue, 21 May 2019 13:35:41 +0200, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> Who are you to judge my facts are not facts?

Hi Carlos,

I'm not afraid of facts because my belief system is _based_ on facts.
o You're the one cowering simply because I asked you to back up your bs

I'm allergic to bullshit, such that I break out in a rash when I hear it:
o Your bullshit
o nospam's bullshit
o Dan Pugert's bullshit
o Shemp's bullshit
o Anyone's' bullshit

Even Mayayana's bullshit - simply because Mayayana can't comprehend facts.
o I've shown Mayayana to be dead wrong so many times, it's just very sad.

The logic of all your brains can be replaced by the results of a coin toss
o Your credibility is _that_ bad

Meanwhile, my credibility is stellar as I've never even once been shown
wrong on material facts(1) since I don't own an imaginary belief system.

If you wonder why I would "risk" alienating you, the answer is simple
o All you both _can_ do, is bullshit.

You're dead wrong that you "need" a Google Account.
o The fact is that you fail the _simplest_ of tests, both you & nospam,

The simplest of tests of an imaginary belief system is three simple words
o Name just one

Those who own imaginary belief systems (i.e., you & nospam) never pass
o You can't ever pass even the _simplest_ of adult belief system tests.

This is the test of anyone who claims you _need_ a Google Account
o Name just one.

Name just 1 functionality you don't already have WITHOUT a Google Account
o Name just one

HINT: I'm not afraid of facts like you bullshitters clearly are.

I ask the questions outright.

o Is there any FUNCTIONALITY that you need to do on Android, that you can't do WITHOUT a Google Account?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/comp.mobile.android/xzaii4eUY_E/8ZI6VRL8AAAJ>

--
(1) Since I'm human and since I've posted thousands upon thousands of facts
on Usenet over many years, I must have, at least once or twice, gotten a
material fact wrong, but since my belief system is based on facts, nobody
has _ever_ found a material fact wrong, and Lord knows, they would _love_
to prove me wrong. Certainly, since Usenet is casual, I make momentary
thinkos and typos, so I'm talking here about material facts, particularlly
those that are challenged, where I've _never_ once been shown to be wrong.
It's not hubris; it's simply that I don't bullshit. My belief system is not
only _based_ on facts, but I modify my belief system as needed, with new
facts. Unfortunately, Usenet contains many people who "intuit" their logic,
sans a shred of facts to back it up, such that they always fail a simple
"name just one" factual challenge, which DESTROYS imaginary belief systems
in seconds (and for that alone, they hate me, which is OK by me as they
don't add any value to the Usenet Potluck by their coin-toss credibility).

[nospam]

In article <qc10t2$2nk$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen G. Holder

<arling...@nospam.net> wrote:

> I'm allergic to bullshit, such that I break out in a rash when I hear it:

then you must be incredibly red and extremely uncomfortable, given that
it's an autoimmune response to your own bullshit.