Peter Brawley
peter.brawley at earthlink.net
Tue Oct 4 12:06:52 CDT 2005
Josh McFarlane wrote: >> Follow the money. Some of that cash goes back to Google, doesn't it? >Not from the sale of the product, but only from advertising on Google. Exactly. >> The question concerned email, not surfing. I'd use such a company for >> email only in an emergency & preferably not at all. >If your idealogy on this is that you're no safer with Hotmail than >Gmail, then I can see what you're thinking. Good. If Hotmail harvests its email archives for advertisers, it's as undesirable as Gmail. >If you're trying to claim Gmail is worse then other >web-based email providers, well, what's some proof? Depends on whether the provider keeps the archives forever and mines them for advertisers. >> That misses the pont entirely. Trust of due process in western >> democracies is arguably rational. But Google operates worldwide. Do you >> trust due process in China, Nigeria, Iran? >Same could be claimed of Rogers. The web is worldwide. If the company >is based out of the US ... What does being based in or out of the US have to do with anything? >... but Nigeria has an ongoing investigation, and >requests information, the company will have to deal with it. Only if the provider has a server in Nigeria, or China &c. >Whether >that means handing over the information or letting the US government >decide how to handle the issue, something would still have to be done, >regardless of whether it's Google or Rogers. Also, nothing is saying >that Google is going to hand over all of this information everytime >foreign governments ask for it. Once again however, they are also not >the only free-email provider that is multinational. Microsoft and >Yahoo also both deal with overseas companies. Yahoo's behaviour in China is a good argument for avoiding Yahoo email. PB -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.9/118 - Release Date: 10/3/2005