> No need to be so greedy and try to compete with Google
Google has been very upfront on exactly how their business model works with users since day one. I don't find this comparison warranted.
Google has been very upfront on exactly how their business model works with users since day one. I don't find this comparison warranted.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/115692/article.html
EDIT: Quote > But Google is planning to scan e-mail and add advertisements that it thinks are relevant to the messages. Additionally, the Gmail privacy policy warns that messages, even if "deleted" by a user, may still be stored in the system, even long after users have closed their account--something that some privacy campaigners believe may be in conflict with U.S. and European data protection and privacy laws.
Article about privacy right there. I talk with people and they always say Google was forced into reviling they read people's gmail. Wasn't true.
I think that statement is too general. From where I was sitting, it looked like people didn't think about privacy at all, and the only thing they were saying was "Holy shit, this is free!" Are you sure the people you tend to talk to are representative of the general population?
Your statement is did people care? That answer is if they did they wouldn't use Google services or FaceBook or most of the Internet.
http://www.infodocket.com/2014/04/30/privacy-google-no-longe...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11012392
They hid and lied about the facts about ad tracking of Education and Apps emails etc. until they were forced to testify about it in federal court and no one was clued into it. Once they got caught tracking and making money on it for many many years they rolled back some stuff. How is that clear communication?
Or how is that "Google has been very upfront on exactly how their business model works with users since day one." ?
I remember when people were scandalized by this, a minority in my circle but it was funny. Of course they were going to do that, what did they expect. I think Google is "evil" now for other set of reasons though.
The closest statements are mealy-mouthed ones along the lines of "we collect information about how you use our services and use that information to improve our services". Which is true of every single business in the history of the world.
> Our automated systems analyze your content (including emails) to provide you personally relevant product features, such as customized search results, tailored advertising, and spam and malware detection.
Deleted comment
I do find it VERY interesting that the first time we get to see the "New Microsoft" profits that the profits were down BUT higher for "cloud."
> Under his leadership, Microsoft has been shifting its business towards cloud services, such as Microsoft Azure, Dynamics CRM and Office 365. http://www.computerweekly.com/news/4500272095/Microsoft-shar...
Otherwise, yes, revenues in the More Personal Computing division were down (with the PC market) while Intelligent Cloud division revenues were up slightly.
That couldn't be further from the truth.
How many people know Google using location data from Android phones to track which physical stores users visit?
They were even mining paid Google Apps for Business accounts for tracking data.
From http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/03/13/26google.h33.ht...
Highlights:
"As part of a potentially explosive lawsuit making its way through federal court, the giant online-services provider Google has acknowledged scanning the contents of millions of email messages sent and received by student users of the company’s Apps for Education tool suite for schools. In the suit, the Mountain View, Calif.-based company also faces accusations from plaintiffs that it went further, crossing a “creepy line” by using information gleaned from the scans to build “surreptitious” profiles of Apps for Education users that could be used for such purposes as targeted advertising."
"A Google spokeswoman confirmed to Education Week that the company “scans and indexes” the emails of all Apps for Education users for a variety of purposes, including potential advertising, via automated processes that cannot be turned off—even for Apps for Education customers who elect not to receive ads. The company would not say whether those email scans are used to help build profiles of students or other Apps for Education users, but said the results of its data mining are not used to actually target ads to Apps for Education users unless they choose to receive them."
...
"Student-data-privacy experts contend that the latter claim is contradicted by Google’s own court filings in the California suit. They describe the case as highly troubling and likely to further inflame rising national concern that protection of children’s private educational information is too lax."
"Mr. Thiele said his district has used Google Apps for Education since 2008. Officials there have always been aware that the company does “back-end processing” of students’ email messages, he said, but the district’s agreement with Google precludes such data from being used to serve ads to students or staff members. As long as the company abides by those terms, Mr. Thiele said, “I don’t have any problem with it.” In an emailed statement provided to Education Week, Bram Bout, the director of Google Apps for Education, said that “ads in Gmail are turned off by default for Google Apps for Education and we have no plans to change that in the future.”" ... "Those plaintiffs in the California lawsuit allege that Google treats Google Apps for Education email users virtually the same as it treats consumer Gmail users. That means not only mining students’ email messages for key words and other information, but also using resulting data—including newly created derivative information, or “metadata”—for “secret user profiling” that could serve as the basis for such activities as delivering targeted ads in Google products other than Apps for Education, such as Google Search, Google+, and YouTube."
"The plaintiffs allege that Google has employed such practices since around 2010, when it began using a new technology, known as Content Onebox, that allows the company to intercept and scan emails before they reach their intended recipients, rather than after messages are delivered to users’ inboxes, regardless of whether ads are turned off."
"While the allegations by the plaintiffs are explosive, it’s the sworn declarations of Google representatives in response to their claims that have truly raised the eyebrows of observers and privacy experts. Contrary to the company’s earlier public statements, Google representatives acknowledged in a September motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ request for class certification that the company’s consumer-privacy policy applies to Apps for Education users. Thus, Google argues, it has students’ (and other Apps for Education users’) consent to scan and process their emails."
"In November, Kyle C. Wong, a lawyer representing Google, also argued in a formal declaration submitted to the court in opposition to the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification that the company’s data-mining practices are widely known, and that the plaintiffs’ complaints that the scanning and processing of their emails was done secretly are thus invalid. Mr. Wong cited extensive media coverage about Google’s data mining of Gmail consumer users’
>Mr. Wong’s inclusion of the following reference to the disclosure provided to students at the University of Alaska particularly caught the attention of privacy advocates: The University of Alaska (“UA”) has a “Google Mail FAQs,” which asks, “I hear that Google reads my email. Is this true?” The answer states, “They do not ‘read’ your email per se. For use in targeted advertising on their other sites, if your email is not encrypted, software (not a person) does scan your email and compile keywords for advertising. For example, if the software looks at 100 emails and identifies the word ‘Doritos’ or ‘camping’ 50 times, they will use that data for advertising on their other sites.” “The fact that Google put this in their declaration means we take it as true,” said Ms. Barnes of the privacy watchdog group EPIC. Google’s sworn court statements reveal that the company has violated student trust by using students’ education records for profit.”
From a Google filing in court about Gmail privacy:
>Indeed, “a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties.” Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735, 743-44 (1979).
>it's "inconceivable" that someone using a Gmail account would not be aware that the information in their email would be known to Google.