Comments on: State Senator Drafts Bill in Wake of Google Gmail Complaints

By: Denise

Denise — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 19:21:09 +0000

I believe the difference is knowing and seeing. Most people are trained to identify cameras in a store. However, Googles gmail policy may not be visible to its user. I have a Gmail account and this is the first time I heard about this. It’s almost like I have no choice, google is so big.

By: Dr.Indranil Chakrabarti

Dr.Indranil Chakrabarti — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 10:11:04 +0000

I think somebody else is using my former id drindranilchakrabarti1970@gmail.com but unfortunately i could not reset my password with the security question as those seems had been changed.Please look into the matter and help me to get access to the said account as important documents were contained within it.

By: poker

poker — Sat, 15 Jan 2005 09:18:02 +0000

Hi everyone A big thank you for this wonderful site, it has helped me immensely

By: phentermine

phentermine — Fri, 07 Jan 2005 19:13:55 +0000

Salut !

By: Peter Rhebergen

Peter Rhebergen — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

When we walk into a store filled with security cameras the store does not ask our permission to take our pictures since it is assumed by the customer that the picture will be taken. Since it is all done in the open the issue of privacy is avoided. Gmail should be viewed in the same manner. Google has made no attempt to hide the background scan, all users signing up for the free email service are entering the contract knowing that the background scan is taking place. How can this be viewed as an invasion of privacy?

By: Mark de Roussier

Mark de Roussier — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Hmmm. When I reply to an email, I often quote chunks of it. What if a Google user were to do the same thing with my mails to them ? Can Google guarantee to avoid scanning quotes ? Perhaps now, but what about later ? Even Figueroa’s legislation is not guaranteed to protect *my* privacy, if the Gmail user has agreed to be scanned. I simply won’t be replying to any emails from GMail. Incidentally, the fact that this comment mechanism demands that I give an email, but will then publish it without my approval if I don’t provide a URI, seems to conflict with this site’s Privacy Policy…

By: PrivacyIsK3y

PrivacyIsK3y — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

I think it is rather ironic that this posting is on a page that has Google’s ADs enabled. ;) Anywho, with respect to this, as long as people are informed about the dangers, why should google care? Afterall, google.com does have to make money somehow.

By: Dustin

Dustin — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Opting out of advertising content? Wouldn’t that defeat the purpose of advertisements, which in turn would make Gmail NOT free? For crying out loud, Gmail is a free service that you don’t have to sign up for! If you want to use something for free, you deal with these things. And its not like Google ads are intrusive, annoying, or completely off base. This page uses them! Top left corner, Ads by Google. Are they offending anyone? email Senator.Figueroa@sen.ca.gov and complain she is wasting the taxpayers dollars. When I get the chance I am voting her out of office.

By: Phreekk

Phreekk — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Before any discussion about privacy and freedom can occur, I think the biggest and most evil of all privacy and freedom issues the Patriot Act needs to be discussed. This is our own government invading our privacy and freedom without our consent. Can I opt-out of the Patriot Act? Sure I can leave the country (opt-out on my own), and then be thrown in Guantanimo Bay as a traitor or terrorist for being against the American Regime.

By: luke

luke — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000

Beware — Gmail’s computer is reading your email, and even worse, Microsoft’s “Word” software reads your important documents whenever you use the spellchecker function. Seriously people, is a computer that “reads” your mail that big of a deal?

As if we don’t have enough laws already!

Long live google!