On Thursday 19 June 2008 15:40:52, Randall R Schulz wrote:

On Thursday 19 June 2008 06:31, Kevin Dupuy wrote:

...

On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 07:51 -0400, Stephen Winners wrote:

...

...

Example: A co-worker just emailed be regarding a stool that is missing from her work area. Stool is not in the subject line, only within the body of the message. Is this something that has been added under the guise of national security - scanning for "terrorist activities" that has been put to another use. promote others?

Although this is off-topic, I'll say that Google does have a computer reading your email and matching it to advertising. That's how they fund GMail.

I think it's worth distinguishing "examining" and "reading." The latter implies understanding and currently can be done only by humans, while the former is merely an algorithmic detection of potential keywords to use to perform an advertisement search.

When (and if) natural language processing becomes a robust and efficient reality, then you might have to worry that a machine is extracting meaning from your email, but not now.

Google conctructs profiles about every gmail user, using the contents, but also any other data that can be derived from emails. You might not care about that because you have nothing to hide, but it can be that one day you want to buy a house, a life insurance, whatever - and you simply can't, because googles profile sold to that company says you're not the type of good customer they want... Or - lets say - the common terrorist as seen by the US governement alsways sends an email at a quarter past three to his mother and you do that too... Please don't start a flame war on this example. It's simple and I guess the criteria will not be "quarter past three" and "mami", ok? Googles also tries to make such profiles using your search entries. But if you have changing IP addresses and disallow cookies for them the they can't. With gmail they can. Daniel -- Daniel Bauer photographer Basel Barcelona professional photography: http://www.daniel-bauer.com erotic art photos: http://www.bauer-nudes.com Madagascar special: http://www.fotograf-basel.ch/madagascar/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

On Friday 20 June 2008 12:20, Randall R Schulz wrote:

On Friday 20 June 2008 12:05, Daniel Bauer wrote:

...

...

Google conctructs profiles about every gmail user, using the contents, but also any other data that can be derived from emails. You might not care about that because you have nothing to hide, but it can be that one day you want to buy a house, a life insurance, whatever - and you simply can't, because googles profile sold to that company says you're not the type of good customer they want...

So far Google has a stated policy of holding per-user information confidential. Do you think they're likely to change that policy? And if so, do you think they'll refuse to allow you to erase all such personal information before they begin selling or otherwise disclosing it?

...

Another thing to consider is that Google is actively developing services for personal medical records management. It's pretty hard to imagine people allowing Google to manage what is just about the most sensitive information anyone has while they are simultaneously selling other personal information. They would seriously undermine their ability to operate in the medical records realm if their users don't perceive them as trustworthy with other personal information. While it's true there are pretty strict laws governing the disclosure of personally identifiable medical information and it would be a felony for them to allow such disclosures, the simple consumer trust issue could easily be enough to derail their intentions to enter or remain in the medical records management realm if they betray users' trust in more mundane realms. Randall Schulz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

John Andersen wrote:

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Daniel Bauer wrote:

...

Google conctructs profiles about every gmail user, using the contents, but also any other data that can be derived from emails. You might not care about that because you have nothing to hide, but it can be that one day you want to buy a house, a life insurance, whatever - and you simply can't, because googles profile sold to that company says you're not the type of good customer they want...

CITATION NEEDED.

As far as I know, nobody has shown that google sells "profiles" of anyone. In fact if you look at their privacy statement they specifically say they dont. http://www.google.com/mail/help/privacy.html

"We do not sell, rent or otherwise share your personal information with any third parties except in the limited circumstances described in the Google Privacy Policy, such as when we believe we are required to do so by law."

Ah, and here's the rub, isn't it? "...such as when we believe we are required by to do so by law." The great escape hatch. Have 'they' defined "[we] believe [we are required]"? What's their definition of "believe"? And, ".....to do so by law" -- whose 'law'? The 'law' in America, in Britain, in Sweden? Law in China? And they don't "share....information with any third parties..." ..... except with the Chinese government who then put a blogger in the slammer after Google gave them his details.

If you are going to spread this FUD, you better have your sources nailed down, documented and proven.

Ciao. -- If you don't succeed you run the risk of failure. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

John Andersen wrote:

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Basil Chupin wrote:

...

John Andersen wrote:

...

On Fri, Jun 20, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Daniel Bauer wrote:

...

Google conctructs profiles about every gmail user, using the contents, but also any other data that can be derived from emails. You might not care about that because you have nothing to hide, but it can be that one day you want to buy a house, a life insurance, whatever - and you simply can't, because googles profile sold to that company says you're not the type of good customer they want...

CITATION NEEDED.

As far as I know, nobody has shown that google sells "profiles" of anyone. In fact if you look at their privacy statement they specifically say they dont. http://www.google.com/mail/help/privacy.html

"We do not sell, rent or otherwise share your personal information with any third parties except in the limited circumstances described in the Google Privacy Policy, such as when we believe we are required to do so by law."

Ah, and here's the rub, isn't it?

"...such as when we believe we are required by to do so by law." The great escape hatch.

Have 'they' defined "[we] believe [we are required]"? What's their definition of "believe"?

And, ".....to do so by law" -- whose 'law'? The 'law' in America, in Britain, in Sweden? Law in China?

Lets stick to comparing apples to apples here...

Ok, let's so that.

The assertion was made that google SELLs personal information. The do no such thing.

Please provide factual references to this otherwise unsubstantiated claim. Google provided the Chinese government with information of one if its users in order to be able to continue to operate in China. There was a heavy price attached to the non-compliance of the request by the Chinese government by not being able to operate in China. By providing the information Google sold this information to the Chinese government which allowed it to continue to operate in China.

This as nothing AT ALL to do with honoring a subpoena or a search warrant?

You were expecting them to barricade the door, break out the shotguns, and go to war to protect your data from the Government YOU elected?

Ce? I didn't help to elect any government in America or China. I don't live in America or China.

Their Lawyers opinion of the validity of the subpoena is the definition of "believe".

There is no such thing as being "required to sell information".

Ah yes, "Their Lawyers opinion.....". This is the "rub" I was referring to ealier. "We BELIEVE..". "Lawyers OPINION...". The backdoor way out. All simple goobly-dook to avoid spelling out what you will never do, and a simple way of covering your arse when you do decide to break your ethics and moral obligation. Anyway, John, this has now gone offtopic so I will end this discussion. Ciao. -- If you don't succeed you run the risk of failure. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

"John Andersen" writes:

Google complied with an Order from the Chinese legal system surrendering information about a person(s) that committed a crime as defined by Chinese lae.

Not that the out come would have been different, but Google should have demonstrated it has some back bone by trying to fight the order. I for one am disappointed that it caved in so early.

Why do I get the feeling you would be first in line condemning any multi-national corporation that refused to follow the laws of YOUR country?

You mean like the "Patriot Act" in the US? Why do I have the feeling that I am living in 1984? I for one will never store my data on any public, let alone foreign servers. Charles

Daniel Bauer wrote:

On Thursday 19 June 2008 15:40:52, Randall R Schulz wrote:

...

...

On Thu, 2008-06-19 at 07:51 -0400, Stephen Winners wrote:

...

...

Example: A co-worker just emailed be regarding a stool that is missing from her work area. Stool is not in the subject line, only within the body of the message. Is this something that has been added under the guise of national security - scanning for "terrorist activities" that has been put to another use. promote others? Although this is off-topic, I'll say that Google does have a computer reading your email and matching it to advertising. That's how they fund GMail. I think it's worth distinguishing "examining" and "reading." The latter implies understanding and currently can be done only by humans, while

On Thursday 19 June 2008 06:31, Kevin Dupuy wrote: the former is merely an algorithmic detection of potential keywords to use to perform an advertisement search.

When (and if) natural language processing becomes a robust and efficient reality, then you might have to worry that a machine is extracting meaning from your email, but not now.

Google conctructs profiles about every gmail user, using the contents, but also any other data that can be derived from emails. You might not care about that because you have nothing to hide, but it can be that one day you want to buy a house, a life insurance, whatever - and you simply can't, because googles profile sold to that company says you're not the type of good customer they want...

Or - lets say - the common terrorist as seen by the US governement alsways sends an email at a quarter past three to his mother and you do that too...

Please don't start a flame war on this example. It's simple and I guess the criteria will not be "quarter past three" and "mami", ok?

Unlike most European countries, the U.S. does not have "guilty until you prove yourself innocent". In the U.S., the government must PROVE guilt, not merely allege it, while keeping you locked up while at the same time expecting you to produce proof of your innocence. Now..if a tip from the US government can get you locked up for life in YOUR country, then I suggest you start working to replace your "Guilty until proven innocent" laws with "innocent until proven guilty." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org