Gmail...

[Sicofit24]

Anyone get any invites for this?
I got one

If you got one, what do you think about it?

[co2boi]

nop, but now I want to know what it is...

[SwoleCat]

It's an e-mail service.

~SC~

[Sicofit24]

nop, but now I want to know what it is...

its a new email system through Google..
its got like a gig of memory and its free.. so you never have to delete any of your emails..
it also automatically filters your spam and saves the sent and replys so your email is almost like a AOL IM conversation..

but only certain people are getting invitations for it.
why I dunno..

[OGPackin]

its a new email system through Google..
its got like a gig of memory and its free.. so you never have to delete any of your emails..
it also automatically filters your spam and saves the sent and replys so your email is almost like a AOL IM conversation..

but only certain people are getting invitations for it.
why I dunno..

Personally i wouldnt use it....They scan ur emails...But anyone can get it...https://gmail.google.com/?dest=http%...le.com%2Fgmail

Scanning email content

All email services scan your email. They do this routinely to provide such popular features as spam filtering, virus detection, search, spellchecking, forwarding, auto-responding, flagging urgent messages, converting incoming email into cell phone text messages, automatic saving and sorting into folders, converting text URLs to clickable links, and reading messages to the blind. These features are widely accepted, trusted, and used by hundreds of millions of people every day.

Google scans the text of Gmail messages in order to filter spam and detect viruses, just as all major webmail services do. Google also uses this scanning technology to deliver targeted text ads and other related information. This is completely automated and involves no humans.

When a user opens an email message, computers scan the text and then instantaneously display relevant information that is matched to the text of the message. Once the message is closed, ads are no longer displayed. It is important to note that the ads generated by this matching process are dynamically generated each time a message is opened by the user--in other words, Google does not attach particular ads to individual messages or to users' accounts.

We recognize that seeing ads based on the content of an email message can be unsettling at first. Our experience has been that this feeling recedes as users become more familiar with Gmail. However, some people, many of whom have not used Gmail, have reacted by condemning all automatic scanning of email content, on the grounds that it amounts to a violation of privacy. We think this criticism is misplaced. All major email services, including Hotmail and Yahoo! Mail, automatically scan email content for the benefit of users. When email messages are fully protected from unwanted disclosure, the automatic scanning of email does not amount to a violation of privacy.

OG

[Sicofit24]

interesting..
thanks OG!

[OGPackin]

interesting..
thanks OG!

Anytime Sico! Google had to entice people with the 1000mb of storage space because of the scanning of email text. People are affraid of that as they should be IMHO.

OG

[co2boi]

Personally i wouldnt use it....They scan ur emails...But anyone can get it...https://gmail.google.com/?dest=http%...le.com%2Fgmail

Scanning email content

All email services scan your email. They do this routinely to provide such popular features as spam filtering, virus detection, search, spellchecking, forwarding, auto-responding, flagging urgent messages, converting incoming email into cell phone text messages, automatic saving and sorting into folders, converting text URLs to clickable links, and reading messages to the blind. These features are widely accepted, trusted, and used by hundreds of millions of people every day.

Google scans the text of Gmail messages in order to filter spam and detect viruses, just as all major webmail services do. Google also uses this scanning technology to deliver targeted text ads and other related information. This is completely automated and involves no humans.

When a user opens an email message, computers scan the text and then instantaneously display relevant information that is matched to the text of the message. Once the message is closed, ads are no longer displayed. It is important to note that the ads generated by this matching process are dynamically generated each time a message is opened by the user--in other words, Google does not attach particular ads to individual messages or to users' accounts.

We recognize that seeing ads based on the content of an email message can be unsettling at first. Our experience has been that this feeling recedes as users become more familiar with Gmail. However, some people, many of whom have not used Gmail, have reacted by condemning all automatic scanning of email content, on the grounds that it amounts to a violation of privacy. We think this criticism is misplaced. All major email services, including Hotmail and Yahoo! Mail, automatically scan email content for the benefit of users. When email messages are fully protected from unwanted disclosure, the automatic scanning of email does not amount to a violation of privacy.

OG

No, you have to have an invitation like Sci said. If you click on that link it takes you to a page for registered users. As far as them scanning my e-mail, so what. I'm not naive enough to send something across an unsecure channel that could be used against me anyway. I think having a gig of space is great.

[Sicofit24]

No, you have to have an invitation like Sci said. If you click on that link it takes you to a page for registered users. As far as them scanning my e-mail, so what. I'm not naive enough to send something across an unsecure channel that could be used against me anyway. I think having a gig of space is great.

My bf sent me one of the invites.. he said that any "free" account is going to scan your email.
ex- yahoo.. hotmail.. etc

Ill just send my resume's and such on the gmail account.

[Hugh-Hefner's-Son]

You are correct in due time anyone will be able to create their own GMAIL account. Although it will be free, months ago, Google began allowing people to pre-purchase email addies for a small fee.

Some people, wisely purchased email names and genre addresses that are now being auctioned on ebay
I am interested to see where this goes and if it takes off like their search engine. You know with them, they always have something up their sleve
i.e their stock...

[OGPackin]

No, you have to have an invitation like Sci said. If you click on that link it takes you to a page for registered users. As far as them scanning my e-mail, so what. I'm not naive enough to send something across an unsecure channel that could be used against me anyway. I think having a gig of space is great.

So what....then u use it. I fer one wont.

Sico, yes other email services scan ur emails, but for viruses. Google will be the first to scan the actual text in ur emails and then send u information based on whats in the text of ur emails. The key words here people are "SCANNING UR TEXT" in emails....

OG

[co2boi]

My bf sent me one of the invites.. he said that any "free" account is going to scan your email.
ex- yahoo.. hotmail.. etc

Ill just send my resume's and such on the gmail account.

Yeah, I mean it's free, so use it up. Plus, you have to understand that scanning and reading are not synonymous. There's not a group of people sitting around google reading your e-mail. If you don't want them grabbing specific words, then use substitutes...

[OGPackin]

Scary shiat IMHO!.

OG

Gmail is too creepy

Presumably you have a Gmail account,
and do not object to Google's policies

But many of us will not send mail to gmail.com ...




Problem 1: Gmail is nearly immortal

Google offers 1 gig of storage, which is many times the storage offered by Yahoo or Hotmail, or other Internet service providers that we know about. The powerful searching encourages account holders to never delete anything. It takes three clicks to put a message into the trash, and more effort to delete this message. It's much easier to "archive" the message, or just leave it in the inbox and let the powerful searching keep track of it. Google admits that even deleted messages will remain on their system, and may also be accessible internally at Google, for an indefinite period of time.
Google has been spinning their original position in press interviews, and with an informal page described as "a few words about privacy and Gmail." When we see fresh material from Google, we check the modification date at the bottom of the terms-of-use page and privacy page for Gmail. If these dates are still April 6 and April 8, we know that nothing has changed. Google can modify these pages too, any way they want and whenever they want, unilaterally. But at least these two pages carry slightly more legal weight than other pages, because Google should attempt to notify users of significant changes in these formal policies.

A new California law, the Online Privacy Protection Act, went into effect on July 1, 2004. Google changed their main privacy policy that same day because the previous version sidestepped important issues and might have been illegal. For the first time in Google's history, the language in their new policy makes it clear that they will be pooling all the information they collect on you from all of their various services. Moreover, they may keep this information indefinitely, and give this information to whomever they wish. All that's required is for Google to "have a good faith belief that access, preservation or disclosure of such information is reasonably necessary to protect the rights, property or safety of Google, its users or the public." Google, you may recall, already believes that as a corporation they are utterly incapable of bad faith. Their corporate motto is "Don't be evil," and they even made sure that the Securities and Exchange Commission got this message in Google's IPO filing.

Google's policies are essentially no different than the policies of Microsoft, Yahoo, Alexa and Amazon. However, these others have been spelling out their nasty policies in detail for years now. By way of contrast, we've had email from indignant Google fans who defended Google by using the old privacy language -- but while doing so they arrived at exactly the wrong interpretation of Google's actual position! Now those emails will stop, because Google's position is clear at last. It's amazing how a vague privacy policy, a minimalist browser interface, and an unconventional corporate culture have convinced so many that Google is different on issues that matter.

After 180 days in the U.S., email messages lose their status as a protected communication under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and become just another database record. This means that a subpoena instead of a warrant is all that's needed to force Google to produce a copy. Other countries may even lack this basic protection, and Google's databases are distributed all over the world. Since the Patriot Act was passed, it's unclear whether this ECPA protection is worth much anymore in the U.S., or whether it even applies to email that originates from non-citizens in other countries.

Google's relationships with government officials in all of the dozens of countries where they operate are a mystery, because Google never makes any statements about this. But here's a clue: Google uses the term "governmental request" three times on their terms-of-use page and once on their privacy page. Google's language means that all Gmail account holders have consented to allow Google to show any and all email in their Gmail accounts to any official from any government whatsoever, even when the request is informal or extralegal, at Google's sole discretion. Why should we send email to Gmail accounts under such draconian conditions?




Problem 2: Google's policies do not apply

The phrasing and qualifiers in the Gmail privacy policy are creepy enough, but nothing in any of Google's policies or public statements applies to those of us who don't have Gmail accounts. Google has not even formally stated in their privacy policy that they will not keep a list of keywords scanned from incoming email, and associate these with the incoming email address in their database. They've said that their advertisers won't get personally identifiable information from email, but that doesn't mean that Google won't keep this information for possible future use. Google has never been known to delete any of the data they've collected, since day one. For example, their cookie with the unique ID in it, which expires in 2038, has been tracking all of the search terms you've ever used while searching their main index.



Problem 3: A massive potential for abuse

If Google builds a database of keywords associated with email addresses, the potential for abuse is staggering. Google could grow a database that spits out the email addresses of those who used those keywords. How about words such as "box cutters" in the same email as "airline schedules"? Can you think of anyone who might be interested in obtaining a list of email addresses for that particular combination? Or how about "mp3" with "download"? Since the RIAA has sent subpoenas to Internet service providers and universities in an effort to identify copyright abusers, why should we expect Gmail to be off-limits?
Intelligence agencies would love to play with this information. Diagrams that show social networks of people who are inclined toward certain thoughts could be generated. This is one form of "data mining," which is very lucrative now for high-tech firms, such as Google, that contract with federal agencies. Email addresses tied to keywords would be perfect for this. The fact that Google offers so much storage turns Gmail into something that is uniquely dangerous and creepy.




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.
Another example is seen in the Google ads at the bottom of this story about Brandon Mayfield. There are two ads. One mentions sexual assault charges (sex has nothing to do with the story), and the other is about anti-terrorism. The entire point of this article, as well as a New York Times piece on May 8, 2004, is that a lawyer has had his career ruined due to overreaction by the FBI, based on disputed evidence. He was arrested as a material witness and his home and office were searched. The NYT (page A12) says that "Mr. Mayfield was arrested before investigators had fully examined his phone records, before they knew if he had ever met with any of the bombing suspects, before they knew if he had ever traveled to Spain or elsewhere overseas. His relatives said he had not been out of the United States for 10 years." The only evidence is a single fingerprint on a plastic bag, and some FBI officials have raised questions about whether this print is a match. While Mr. Mayfield will get his day in court, it appears that Google's ads have already convicted him, and for good measure added some bogus sexual assault charges as well. Would Mr. Mayfield be well-advised to send email to Gmail account holders to plead his case?

Our last example shows three ads fed by Google at the bottom of a Washington Post column titled "Gmail leads way in making ads relevant." The columnist argues that Google's relevant ads improve the web, and therefore she finds nothing objectionable about Gmail. These Google-approved ads offer PageRank for sale, something which only a year ago, Google would have considered high treason. Yes, these ads are "relevant" -- the column is about Google, and the ads are about PageRank. But here's the point: A relevant ad that shows poor judgment is much worse than an irrelevant ad that shows poor judgment. The ads at the bottom of her column disprove her pro-Google arguments. She has no control over this, and is probably not even aware that it happened.

Most writers, even if they are only writing an email message instead of a column in a major newspaper, have more respect for their words than Google does. Don't expect these writers to answer their Gmail.

[Hugh-Hefner's-Son]

Interesting info, but is it neccessary to take up all this space, can you just post the links please ??

[OGPackin]

Interesting info, but is it neccessary to take up all this space, can you just post the links please ??

Ummm..and who are u..? Ya it is neccessary!

OG

[Sicofit24]

Ummm..and who are u..? Ya it is neccessary!

OG

hahaha

[decadbal]

messyuk will show up soon thinkin its a signup for Gaymail... you dont pronounce the ay..lol

[l6873]

I have 6 invites so if anyone wants one, post your email address.

[builtthekid]

Man i really dont care its not like im gonna do anything illegal
hahahahahahahah.

[Elliot]

[email protected] send me one

[OGPackin]

I have 6 invites so if anyone wants one, post your email address.

I have 6 now also....Iv got connections... Anyone wants one let me know and PM me ur email addy..

OG

[Pg4aL]

I've got 6 invitations now, send me a private message and I give you one

[OGPackin]

[email protected] send me one

Uv got mail..

OG

[Elliot]

I have 6 now also....Iv got connections... Anyone wants one let me know and PM me ur email addy..

OG

thenx suga

[LeanMeOut]

thenx suga

You did not just call someone else suga. You slut


<<LMO>>

[OGPackin]

thenx suga

Anytime cup cake..

OG

[OGPackin]

You did not just call someone else suga. You slut


<<LMO>>

Bitch...

OG

[Elliot]

You did not just call someone else suga. You slut


<<LMO>>

he's a provider.. your just a taker..

[LeanMeOut]

he's a provider.. your just a taker..

We are through bitch This is our official AR homogay break up.


Mass Junkie is better than you anyway

<<LMO>>

[Elliot]

We are through bitch This is our official AR homogay break up.


Mass Junkie is better than you anyway

<<LMO>>

yeah he can just walk into your anus.. with a step ladder of course

[IronCy]

Can anyone hook Cy up.....man, i have been trying to get one of these **** things forever...hit me at [email protected] if you can help out.
-Cy

[Slick Arrado]

I have 6 invites so if anyone wants one, post your email address.

Any invites left? [email protected] if you do. :spudniklu