[SATLUG] (OT) Privacy issues with Gmail?

[FIRESTORM_v1]

Ditto...  I thought I'd ask, just to be sure my thinking was on par
with everyone else's..

FIRESTORM_v1
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 16:59:12 -0500, Jeremy Mann <jeremymann at gmail.com> wrote:
> Whenever you have something that is stored on somebody else's server
> for free, you cannot expect 100% security. There is always a catch.
> But I'd rather have it on Google than Yahoo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 13 Sep 2004 16:29:46 -0500, Matt <firestorm-v1 at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> > Someone sent me this link regarding Gmail and I thought most of it was
> > pure BS.  Please let me know what you think?
> >
> > http://www.gmail-is-too-creepy-com
> >
> > On a side note, when asked what I felt about Gmail, I responded as so:
> >
> > That is an interesting link, however there are a few things that need to
> > be addressed:
> >
> > There is an issue that I have with 'Problem 4' on that page.
> > Problem 4: Inappropriate ad matching
> >
> > We don't use Gmail, but it is safe to assume that the ad matching is no
> > better in Gmail, than it is in news articles that use contextual ad
> > feeds from Google. Here's a screen shot that shows an inappropriate
> > placement of Google ads in a news article. We also read about a lawyer
> > who is experimenting with Gmail. He sent himself a message, and
> > discovered that the law practice footer he uses at the bottom of all of
> > his email triggered an ad for a competing law firm.
> >
> > The screen shot that he is referring to is a bit odd as Google is not
> > geting the information from the news site but rather Doubleclick. It's
> > doubleclick that is not passing the correct information to Google for
> > processing. It's also worth mentioning that the screenshot is NOT a shot
> > of Gmail but rather that of some news site. Gmail's ads are much less
> > unobtrousive and take up about as much as an inch wide by three inch
> > deep box on the right hand side of the mail you are reading.
> >
> > The Gmail ad targeting appears to be far superior than that of news
> > sites (primarially because Google serves the ads not spyware-infested
> > Doubleclick,etc..) and is usually head-on with the topic of discussion.
> > Imagine my shock when talking to a friend about a firewire lattice
> > network I see ads describing firewire hardware and custom-length
> > cabling. Usually (in the case of Yahoo) their ads are mostly for the
> > University of Phoneix, Morgatgage your house, and ink toner refills.
> >
> > Another issue that the page doesn't mention is that MSN, Hotmail, Yahoo
> > Mail and the other free services all use advertising as well A lot of it
> > is targeted against the content of the message that you happen to be
> > reading at the time. This has been proven time and time again to be
> > wildly inaccurate. What does home mortgages have to do with a server
> > log?
> >
> > If these people don't like Gmail's TOS, why aren't they quoting the old
> > version versus the new versions? Have these people looked at Yahoo's
> > TOS?
> >
> > This is Yahoo's TOS:
> >
> > They do censoring:
> > You acknowledge that Yahoo! may or may not pre-screen Content, but that
> > Yahoo! and its designees shall have the right (but not the obligation)
> > in their sole discretion to pre-screen, refuse, or move any Content that
> > is available via the Service....
> >
> > They too will turn over your personally identifiable info in a
> > heartbeat:
> > You acknowledge, consent and agree that Yahoo! may access, preserve, and
> > disclose your account information and Content if required to do so by
> > law or in a good faith belief that such access preservation or
> > disclosure is reasonably necessary to: (a) comply with legal process;
> > (b) enforce the TOS; (c) respond to claims that any Content violates the
> > rights of third-parties; (d) respond to your requests for customer
> > service; or (e) protect the rights, property, or personal safety of
> > Yahoo!, its users and the public.....
> >
> > If pushed, they can tell you what you can and can not do with your
> > information:
> > You understand that the Service and software embodied within the Service
> > may include security components that permit digital materials to be
> > protected, and use of these materials is subject to usage rules set by
> > Yahoo! and/or content providers who provide content to the Service.....
> >
> > Yahoo's privacy statement can be found at http://privacy.yahoo.com To
> > those of you reading Yahoo through Outlook or other HTML based email
> > client might want to reconsider if privacy is a big thing. Yahoo freely
> > admits to using 'web beacons' which are a way of telling when/if a
> > message has been opened, by whom and how many times it has been
> > forwarded, etc.
> > Details on web beacons can be found here:
> > http://privacy.yahoo.com/privacy/us/pixels/details.html
> >
> > If these people really want to nitpick, the only way to have guaranteed
> > security with your email would be to buy a dedicated server, load it up
> > with a monster-sized HD and let it send and receive email. That way you
> > don't have to worry about your email client working against you, but
> > what about the people who read it.
> >
> > I'm open to discussion however I'm afraid that this is more
> > sensationalist than the issue really is.
> >
> > What are your thoughts?
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Satlug mailing list
> > Satlug at satlug.org
> > http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug
> >
> 
> 
> --
> Jeremy
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Satlug mailing list
> Satlug at satlug.org
> http://alamo.satlug.org/mailman/listinfo/satlug
>