OT- Goo Goo for Google's Web e-mail
Chuck
and so far all the reviews I've read about it say that it is fantastic,
plush, and unlike any other e-mail service currently available.
~enjoy
=========
Gmail Hits the Auction Block
Restricted invitations to Google's Web e-mail beta are drawing big bids on
EBay.
Ever since Google launched limited beta testing of Gmail, its free Web-based
e-mail service, getting an account has been something like gaining entry to
an exclusive nightclub.
"Gmail has been stellar so far," Ng raves. "The interface is amazing and is
much easier to use than other online e-mail accounts. All I have to say is
'Watch out, Hotmail!'"
Danziger says that he hasn't seen any spam in his inbox since making the
switch.
Full story...
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,116293,00.asp
SANDITYPES
>and so far all the reviews I've read about it say that it is fantastic,
>plush, and unlike any other e-mail service currently available.
>
>~enjoy
>=========
Seems to me it was discussed on either this board or another one not too long
ago, and then I saw a news report about it last week: The privacy issue with
Google, which I don't think we were clear on when we discussed it before, is
that it searches for words in your email and sends you spam (or,
euphemistically, "advertising") accordingly. For example, if your email
mentions traveling or vacation, you might get travel spam. That was the
example they used.
I believe in the previous discussion it was also mentioned that Google allows
mining by the authorities of users' e-mail without search warrant. That I'm
not sure about, but the first one is good enough for me not to use it.
Sandi
Michelle
news:20040531093324...@mb-m23.aol.com...
> I believe in the previous discussion it was also mentioned that Google
allows
> mining by the authorities of users' e-mail without search warrant. That
I'm
> not sure about, but the first one is good enough for me not to use it.
>
> Sandi
California senate approved an anti-Gmail because of this. Here is a link
http://i.cmpnet.com/securitypipeline/categorySubhead_news.gif .
Speaking of privacy, I got a 12-pack of Coke the other day - they are
running a new sweepstakes where one of the cans has a GPS chip embedded - on
the package it says, "open the GPS can, and we'll call YOU". I find this
extremely creepy.
Michelle
Judity01
Old news, Chuck.
Judity
djgordon
discussion the emails were not ever read by human eyes. Google scanned them
for keywords in order to put advertising on the page you are looking at,
they weren't going to send an email to you.
Dani
"SANDITYPES" <sandi...@aol.comshazbot> wrote in message
news:20040531093324...@mb-m23.aol.com...
Eliyahu Rooff
"Michelle" <mishe...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:KAGuc.12458$Lq1....@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
>
>
> Speaking of privacy, I got a 12-pack of Coke the other day - they are
> running a new sweepstakes where one of the cans has a GPS chip
embedded - on
> the package it says, "open the GPS can, and we'll call YOU". I find
this
> extremely creepy.
>
"find you," I wouldn't have a problem with it. There's nothing
particularly new or unusual about the technology other than using it to
fill a soda can.
Eliyahu
Michelle
> Considering that they'll be bringing some substantial prizes when they
> "find you," I wouldn't have a problem with it. There's nothing
> particularly new or unusual about the technology other than using it to
> fill a soda can.
>
> Eliyahu
>
track anyone at any time these days. Soon companies will probably start
selling tracking chips, like they did with those tiny little spy cameras. I
guess there really is no such thing as true privacy anymore.
Michelle
CConerly
through the securities menu. I saw a bit on TV about it recently.
Apparently, there is a company that offers (for a fee) the ability to
pinpoint the location on a map on the internet, and many parents are using
it to keep up with their kids.
Cindy C.
"Michelle" <mishe...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:_eHuc.12464$Lq1....@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 05/26/2004
K. Carp
I know that my cell phone knows which time zone I am in (or *it* is in). The
first time I noticed that I was shocked. I don't often wear a watch, and I
use my cell phone clock to know what time it is. I looked at my phone in
Houston, ready to subtract 2 hours from the time...
Took me a minute to figure it out.
K
"CConerly" <CCon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2i15flF...@uni-berlin.de...
SANDITYPES
>I know that my cell phone knows which time zone I am in (or *it* is in). The
>first time I noticed that I was shocked. I don't often wear a watch, and I
>use my cell phone clock to know what time it is. I looked at my phone in
>Houston, ready to subtract 2 hours from the time...
>Took me a minute to figure it out.
>
>K
>
from which to get a signal. There's probably something about the signal or
tower that indicates time zone.
Sandi
K. Carp
something to do with the fact that this phone has GPS.
Not sure, though.
K
"SANDITYPES" <sandi...@aol.comshazbot> wrote in message
news:20040531131506...@mb-m03.aol.com...
Bob
sandi...@aol.comshazbot says...
It was discussed here, but you may have also discussed it on one of your
other boards.
Their privacy policy basically states there is none. Also, when you delete
something, it's not really deleted. You won't be able to read it anymore,
but they are going to keep everything forever.
They say they will release personally identifiable information, including
contact information, upon receipt of any governmental request.
I notified them that their terms were so vague that they could honor a
request for the contact info on 'HotChicagoBabe' from a Chicago garbage
collector. They didn't deny that they could or would do so.
Nope. Gmail is not for me and I will not send mail to any Gmail account.
Now, I wonder if there is anything I can legally do to keep Gmail from
archiving email I send to someone who may have an email forwarding address
set to forward to Gmail. In this case, I have no way of knowing my email is
going to end up at Gmail and thus, they can't claim I've given my consent
for them to archive my email.
For those of you who don't understand what I mean about an email forwarding
address, the address in my posts, when properly de-spammed, is an address
that automatically forwards any email sent to it, to another email address
I specify. Why do I do this? In the past 10 years, I've lived in several
states and have had several different ISPs, but have only had one email
address.
Bob/Texas
Remove 'not' to send me email.
14tonks
addressed to someone else, it's just the same as once you send a letter to
addressed to someone else. It's their e-mail/letter now, and what they do
with it after receipt is their business. They can forward it to
someone/somewhere else, publish it on the front page of the NY Times, print
it in a biography detailing your misspent lift, sell it at auction,
whatever. If you don't want your words to end up somewhere you don't like
or used for purposes of which you do not approve, don't put them in writing.
--
Sheila
To reply to me, add the prefix real. to my address.
"Bob" <notto...@forevermail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b2539cc9...@news-server.satx.rr.com...
Bob
kath...@comcastexcess.net says...
> very interesting...
> I know that my cell phone knows which time zone I am in (or *it* is in). The
> first time I noticed that I was shocked. I don't often wear a watch, and I
> use my cell phone clock to know what time it is. I looked at my phone in
> Houston, ready to subtract 2 hours from the time...
> Took me a minute to figure it out.
>
> K
That's because the phone gets the time from the cell phone network.
Take any non-GPS phone on a flight from New York to California. Turn the
phone off when instructed to do so by the flight attendants. Turn the phone
on when you get off the airplane in California. When it powers up, it will
get the correct time from the cell phone network.
Bob/Texas
Bob
kath...@comcastexcess.net says...
> My old cell phone didn't do change time zones. I think it more like has
> something to do with the fact that this phone has GPS.
>
> Not sure, though.
> K
>
Nope. Sandi is correct. It gets the time from the cell phone network. We
have 3 non-GPS phones. They all change the time correctly when traveling
around Texas.
Bob/Texas
Bob
says...
> I don't think you'd have a leg to stand on, Bob. Once you send an e-mail
> addressed to someone else, it's just the same as once you send a letter to
> addressed to someone else. It's their e-mail/letter now, and what they do
> with it after receipt is their business. They can forward it to
> someone/somewhere else, publish it on the front page of the NY Times, print
> it in a biography detailing your misspent lift, sell it at auction,
> whatever. If you don't want your words to end up somewhere you don't like
> or used for purposes of which you do not approve, don't put them in writing.
>
You are correct. I was just hoping there might be something I have
overlooked.
Bob/Texas
RaeMorrill
>> addressed to someone else, it's just the same as once you send a letter to
>> addressed to someone else. It's their e-mail/letter now, and what they do
>> with it after receipt is their
I'd swear we had a discussion on this once in here where someone insisted that
any email you send someone is still copyrighted by you and they can't use it as
they wish.
Rae Morrill in Maine
"Ya can't get theyuh from heeah"
_______________________________
Spam mailers WILL be reported to their respective postmasters and AOL TOSSPAM!
K. Carp
it, but maybe that was so long ago it didn't work that way "back then". who
knows. I just thought it was weird that my cell phone knew where I was!
K
"Bob" <notto...@forevermail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b253f0dd...@news-server.satx.rr.com...
Bob
raemo...@aol.com.com says...
Correct. Anything you write has an automatic copyright. The trick would be
successfully suing anyone who forwarded an email.
Bob/Texas
Gdubson
>that any email you send someone is still copyrighted by you and they can't use
it
>as they wish.
>
>Rae Morrill in Maine
Do you remember a few years ago some clown posting here and putting a copyright
notice on everything he posted? As though his words were so valuable, he had
to put "hands off" on everything. He didn't last long here.
Gisele
14tonks
> successfully suing anyone who forwarded an email.
>
> Bob/Texas
Right, it would be like suing them for putting your letter to them in a box
in the attic instead of burning it. Just because they have stored it in
perpetuity, where a newspaper reporter might find it someday, and publish it
under "fair use" if you become famous/infamous, or an unauthorized
biographer might be able to access it even if you instructed your executor
to burn the copy among your own papers, doesn't mean you/your estate can
file a legal complaint. If someone uses it in a way that violates your
copyright in a country and within a time frame that you/your heirs still
have legal copyright, yes, you might have a case. But you can't sue someone
for storing in a manner that makes that more likely to occur (or for using
it in a manner within the "fair use" laws even while it is still under
copyright). By the same token, if the government wants to request all your
correspondence, they get any correspondence they can find, copyrighted or
not, and you have no complaint because someone else saved correspondence you
wanted destroyed. The words might belong to you under copyright law, but
the physical or virtual message you sent them was theirs to do with as they
wished, and the fact it is "copyrighted" doesn't prevent it being entered in
evidence against you in a court of law.
SANDITYPES
>addressed to someone else, it's just the same as once you send a letter to
>addressed to someone else. It's their e-mail/letter now, and what they do
>with it after receipt is their business. They can forward it to
>someone/somewhere else, publish it on the front page of the NY Times, print
>it in a biography detailing your misspent lift, sell it at auction,
>whatever. If you don't want your words to end up somewhere you don't like
>or used for purposes of which you do not approve, don't put them in writing.
>--
>
>Sheila
>To reply to me, add the prefix real. to my address.
>
on faxes, stating that the e-mail is intended for the recipient only and is not
to be forwarded or otherwise distributed without the sender's permission. One
of my husband's executive clients has this on her e-mail, and I believe that he
put a similar disclaimer on his own e-mail after having several that were meant
for internal use only get forwarded out to the client with (ahem) interesting
results.
Sandi
Mike DeTuri
> Their privacy policy basically states there is none. Also, when you delete
> something, it's not really deleted. You won't be able to read it anymore,
> but they are going to keep everything forever.
That's not what it really says. It says that when you close your
account or delete your messages some of that information may remain on
their servers after that date in their backup files. Since server
backups are a fairly standard practice privacy policies should inform
users of this.
> They say they will release personally identifiable information, including
> contact information, upon receipt of any governmental request.
Not exactly. Here's what they do say:
"You do, however, agree that Google may monitor, edit or disclose your
personal information, including the content of your emails, if required
to do so in order to comply with any valid legal process or governmental
request (such as a search warrant, subpoena, statute, or court order),
or as otherwise provided in these Terms of Use and the Gmail Privacy
Policy."
For those interested, here's a link to one of my posts in our previous
discussion. http://tinyurl.com/3387u
I don't see it as a problem with Google policies as much as it's a
problem with what is considered a "valid legal process" these days. I
don't think it's reasonable to expect Google or anyone else to break the
law to protect my privacy.
I heard an interview with someone from EFF recently who stated that the
government had requested records on everyone who had taken SCUBA diving
lessons because they thought that terrorists might attack boats using
SCUBA divers. The EFF guy said that the Patriot Act allowed them to go
on this kind of a fishing expedition.
According to the article about this on the EFF site the FBI had a
subpoena from a grand jury to get this information.
http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/20021021_eff_pr.html
Personally, I'm not any more worried about Gmail violating my privacy
than I am about Google's search engine violating my privacy. Here are
some quotes:
"Google does not collect any unique information about you (such as your
name, email address, etc.) except when you specifically and knowingly
provide such information. Google notes and saves information such as
time of day, browser type, browser language, and IP address with each
query."
"Please be aware, however, that we will release specific personal
information about you if required to do so in order to comply with any
valid legal process such as a search warrant, subpoena, statute, or
court order."
http://www.google.com/privacy.html
The Terms of Service for Google.com also mention that they can change
these terms at any time without notice or end-user consent, which is
also what they say in the GMail terms of service.
Mike DeTuri
http://www.deturi.com
Bam
> put a similar disclaimer on his own e-mail after having several that were
meant
> for internal use only get forwarded out to the client with (ahem)
interesting
> results.
How does the disclaimer stop the forward?
Mike DeTuri
Google's servers pop up on their results page after you do a search on
their site.
Mike DeTuri
http://www.deturi.com
Mike DeTuri
in your pet in case it got lost. If the technology exists to track a
pet this way, that technology can be used on humans as well. Although,
I imagine it would be illegal to get the data without a subpoena or
court order. On the other hand, think if Carly Bruscia had one of those
tags. It could have saved her life.
Mike DeTuri
http://www.deturi.com
14tonks
material not meant for distribution to the clients, if they are too dumb to
figure that out for themselves, which apparently some of them have been.
Any kind of confidentiality notice or request is only as good as the
recipient's conscience. If you are truly worried about something being
traced back to you or ending up where you don't want it, don't put it in
writing, and don't let it be recorded either.
--
Sheila
To reply to me, add the prefix real. to my address.
"Bam" <scimed...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2i1u6pF...@uni-berlin.de...
14tonks
"Mike DeTuri" <se...@webpage.com> wrote in message
news:7IidnWV3Hub...@adelphia.com...
>
> I heard an interview with someone from EFF recently who stated that the
> government had requested records on everyone who had taken SCUBA diving
> lessons because they thought that terrorists might attack boats using
> SCUBA divers. The EFF guy said that the Patriot Act allowed them to go
> on this kind of a fishing expedition.
>
> According to the article about this on the EFF site the FBI had a
> subpoena from a grand jury to get this information.
>
> http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/20021021_eff_pr.html
>
Sounds like Barb needs a new hobby, quick, before they combine this with the
Patriot Act, and she is disappeared without a forwarding address for the
next year or so.
This is the kind of stuff that scares me to death, and has convinced me I'd
vote for a little yellow dog for President before I'd vote to put the
current administration back in office for another four years.
14tonks
or anybody else the right and the ability to track my whereabouts at every
moment.
--
Sheila
To reply to me, add the prefix real. to my address.
"Mike DeTuri" <se...@webpage.com> wrote in message
news:16udnUAKE88...@adelphia.com...
Bob
says...
posted in another newsgroup because someone said they were going to extract
the text, put it in a book, and sell it.
It wasn't necessary, given the automatic copyright, but it put the other
person on notice that they would be in for a fight if they tried it.
It's possible that I would sometimes forget to turn off my .sig before I
posted here, so it may have turned up on some of my posts in this
newsgroup.
Bob/Texas
SANDITYPES
>or anybody else the right and the ability to track my whereabouts at every
>moment.
>--
>
>Sheila
Amen to that!
Sandi
SANDITYPES
times it has happened, the people forwarding claimed it was a
"misunderstanding," so now they can't exactly say that any more. Those
disclaimers on fax cover sheets don't do anything "with teeth" either, but they
do put people on notice.
As for not putting anything in writing, that would be pretty hard to do in an
industry where virtually all communication is via e-mail, so a person just has
to take whatever steps they can to minimize the problems.
Sandi
K. Carp
the text, put it in a book, and sell it.>>
Hmmmmm... that concept sounds vaguely familiar.
:-)
"Bob" <notto...@forevermail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b259293...@news-server.satx.rr.com...
Bob
sandi...@aol.comshazbot says...
I wonder if that has any legal clout.
Bob/Texas
Bob
If that's what it says now, then they have changed it since I looked at it
and complained when Gmail first was announced. In that case, they are doing
horrible customer service/public relations because the response I got was
in no way related to what I was complaining about and did not give me any
assurance that a human was ever going to read what I wrote.
Bob/Texas
Bob
says...
Given the overwhelming bipartisan support for the Patriot Act, I won't be
voting for either of the big two parties.
Bob/Texas
Bob
> I thought I saw an ad someplace where they could implant a tracking chip
> in your pet in case it got lost. If the technology exists to track a
> pet this way, that technology can be used on humans as well. Although,
> I imagine it would be illegal to get the data without a subpoena or
> court order. On the other hand, think if Carly Bruscia had one of those
> tags. It could have saved her life.
>
> Mike DeTuri
> http://www.deturi.com
>
Mike,
There's no way I'd chip any member of my family.
I will also never have a vehicle with On-Star or similar service.
Bob/Texas
Mike DeTuri
collected from the last time we went around about this. :)
Mike DeTuri
http://www.deturi.com
Bob
I don't think you are confused. I suspect I may have gotten a very early
look at the site. It was some time in March, before the public
announcement.
Bob/Texas
Mike DeTuri
benefits outweigh the risks.
The way these things work, generally, is that there's a loud outcry when
they are first introduced and then everything settles down as the
mainstream begins to embrace the technology. This embrace seems to
happen whether the privacy concerns go away or not.
Remember all the privacy concerns people had about Windows XP? Even
Windows Update was criticized after it was shown that Microsoft was
collecting specific data about you and non-MS products installed on your
PC, but I don't remember Microsoft issuing a patch to fix it and I still
see people recommending WU all over the net.
http://www.tecchannel.com/security/client/58/
Ultimately, I think it just depends on what level of privacy you're
willing to give up for convenience and the feeling of safety. :)
Mike DeTuri
http://www.deturi.com
Mike DeTuri
heard about it on TechTV a few days before we discussed it here last
time, but I'm positive it was after the public announcement.
djgordon
me for a week. They'd follow me from the kitchen to the bathroom to the
computer to bed and out on errands once a week...whoopie.
Dani
"SANDITYPES" <sandi...@aol.comshazbot> wrote in message
news:20040531215826...@mb-m11.aol.com...
RaeMorrill
>computer to bed and out on errands once a week...whoopie.
>
Hey, that's a good point. LOL. See the little dot sitting in same place for
hours (in chair at computer), they'd probably send paramedics in thinking
someone was dead.
Bob
Mike,
RSS news aggregator to cover strategic blogs.
Bob/Texas
K. Carp
> RSS news aggregator to cover strategic blogs.
>
Is that English?
K
"Bob" <notto...@forevermail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b26f00ab...@news-server.satx.rr.com...
RaeMorrill
>> RSS news aggregator to cover strategic blogs.
>>
>
>Is that English?
I think someone got their fingers off the home keys.
Bob
No, it's Nerdese:-)
Bob/Texas
In article <IJydnQBkNM_...@comcast.com>,
kath...@comcastexcess.net says...
Bob
K. Carp
I don't think I can even say "where are the restrooms" in Nerdese!
;-)
Kathy
"Bob" <notto...@forevermail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b29969aa...@news-server.satx.rr.com...
Joi Cardinal
> The privacy issue with
> Google, which I don't think we were clear on when we discussed it before, is
> that it searches for words in your email and sends you spam (or,
> euphemistically, "advertising") accordingly. For example, if your email
> mentions traveling or vacation, you might get travel spam. That was the
> example they used.
Here's an interesting review which addresses that the ad issue:
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techreviews/products/2004-06-02-gmail_x.htm
It says, in part:
"In its many postings on privacy, Google also says it would "block
certain ads from running next to an e-mail about catastrophic news."
I tested it by sending an e-mail to my Gmail account with
"catastrophic" news about the death of a fictional uncle, who "died"
tragically while vacationing in Hawaii.
Sure enough, no ads for funeral homes appeared. Nor did any useful
links to mortuaries in Hawaii.
But when I appended the tragic news to a conversation about Cisco
routers and sent it to my Gmail account, technical ads suddenly
appeared.
There seem to be ways to get around the ads. The Cisco thread, for
instance, did not trigger any when it was in a Microsoft Word document
sent as an attachment.
As someone who read Google's policies, which were written in plain
English, and willingly signed up, I had no problem with the message
scanning — and the company promises not to sell your data to third
parties"
Joi
Bam
"Joi Cardinal" <joica...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c2107c77.04060...@posting.google.com...
> scanning - and the company promises not to sell your data to third
> parties"
>
> Joi
Joi Cardinal
> How did you get an account.... I thought I read they were just testing.
The whole post was a quote of part of a review of the service.
I may give it a try when it's rolled out.
Joi