Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Will Stop Reading Your Emails for Gmail Ads

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 460 posts

Re: Google Will Stop Reading Your Emails for Gmail Ads

#381

Post by CaptSpify »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #224
sqeaky wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> data isn't shared with anyone else without my consent Do you have any way of verifying this? I am not accusing google of anything, I just find this to be an interesting level of trust to have with a free online service.

Google is a large, generally reputable company which has very little to gain and everything to lose by sharing my personal information with others in violation of their own privacy policy. In the absence of any evidence that they _are_ sharing my private information with others, I see no reason not to trust them in this regard.

Even though they've given some people's info away already to at least the US government?

That just seems silly

Re: Google Will Stop Reading Your Emails for Gmail Ads

#382

Post by CaptSpify »

sqeaky wrote: post #306
sqeaky wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> data isn't shared with anyone else without my consent Do you have any way of verifying this? I am not accusing google of anything, I just find this to be an interesting level of trust to have with a free online service.

I am curious about the downvotes. Do we really downvote people here for questioning trusting Google? I didn't even say not to trust google, I just questioned the level of trust.

Meh, people do that here, not sure why. But to answer your question: no, there's not.

Google has already secretly given people's info away. They've admitted to getting and complying with NSL's already.

Re: Google Will Stop Reading Your Emails for Gmail Ads

#383

Post by newscracker »

DerfNet wrote: post #179
vaishaksuresh wrote: post #173

I very recently switched to fastmail and couldn't be happier. For $90 a year, I don't have to deal with people snooping and tracking me around for ads. I know google is trying to give me value with all their facial recognition and recommendations, but I don't think it is going to end well. When it does end badly, it will be too late for the user because we would've given up all the data. I don't want Google to build…

Is there any reason not to go with ProtonMail? They seem to be the big recommendation lately for encrypted email service.

ProtonMail does not yet have IMAP support (it's in beta after more than two years of requests). So if you ever get tired of ProtonMail and want to move to some other provider, your only option is to save each mail or print it out - one by one. There is no bulk mail export option. Unless one is super confident of staying happy with ProtonMail for at least a year or two (by when I expect IMAP to be publicly available on the platform), I'd stay away from it for any serious use.

Leaving this aside, other factors do favor ProtonMail. The people who run it seem to have their minds and hearts in the right place as far as privacy is concerned.

Re: Google Will Stop Reading Your Emails for Gmail Ads

#384

Post by newscracker »

weitzj wrote: post #229
weitzj wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are using fastmail as well, and it is great. They have a solution for every weird mail-problem we tried to solve, i.e. shared inbox folders, shared calendars and integration with "dump" client applications. For example your username might differ in order to access a shared calendar. Also you can generate application passwords for an account. So you can create an SMTP-only application password for your fastmail acc…

Oh. And personally I am using mailbox.org which is also nice but a little bit cheaper. And the feature-set is still great, but limited compared to FastMail. Also the webui in mailbox.org is slower than for fastmail.

I'd recommend Posteo [1] and Mailbox [2] to people mainly for the costs. They're cheap and are a lot more flexible in pricing as your needs grow.

Fastmail becomes terribly expensive once you realize you need multiple accounts (not just aliases) for different people in the family. At least for me, paying a few hundred dollars on Fastmail (or anywhere else) for email is really way too expensive. I've also written to Fastmail asking for flexible pricing options, but they responded that they're not even considering any changes on pricing/flexibility for the near future.

Edit: If one doesn't need custom domains and office suites, I'd recommend only Posteo! That company is way ahead of others in being better for all humans (read on their website about all the things they do).

[1]: https://www.posteo.de

[2]: https://www.mailbox.org

Re: Google Will Stop Reading Your Emails for Gmail Ads

#385

Post by newscracker »

tomaskafka wrote: post #303
vaishaksuresh wrote: post #173

I very recently switched to fastmail and couldn't be happier. For $90 a year, I don't have to deal with people snooping and tracking me around for ads. I know google is trying to give me value with all their facial recognition and recommendations, but I don't think it is going to end well. When it does end badly, it will be too late for the user because we would've given up all the data. I don't want Google to build…

I have a problem with price. $90 for about 20 personal emails per year and a bunch of useful newsletters? Is there a $10 hosted mail that sends and receives reliably and doesn't sell my personal data on top of subscription (like AV companies)?

My recommendations for cheaper, more flexible and privacy respecting services are Posteo (no custom domains) and Mailbox (allows custom domains). See my comment above at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14624624

Re: Google Will Stop Reading Your Emails for Gmail Ads

#386

Post by jodrellblank »

rubber_duck wrote: post #258
watwut wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Relevant ad is euphemism for "ad that makes you buy stuff you would happily not own otherwise". Since ads in general work (they make people buy more or different stuff) and you can not objectively evaluate whether you was influenced by ads, it is rational to avoid them. Practically, once add service knows I am women, it insist on showing me ads for menstruation cups everywhere I browse. I also find juxtaposition of b…

>Relevant ad is euphemism for "ad that makes you buy stuff you would happily not own otherwise". Since ads in general work (they make people buy more or different stuff) and you can not objectively evaluate whether you was influenced by ads, it is rational to avoid them. Umm - you should avoid getting information because it might influence you to buy things ? There's nothing wrong with what you said, in an ideal worl…

Umm - you should avoid getting information because it might influence you to buy things?

UMMMMMMmmmmm - yes?

Obviously?

If you wouldn't let a salesperson barge into your house, interrupt your reading to try and convince you to get discount eye surgery, why would you let that happen in visual form?

in an ideal world ads would be just that - informing the customer about your product

This is not anything like an 'ideal' world. One human has such limited attention, that you could spend every second of your lifetime attending to a different product and do nothing else, and you still wouldn't cover them all. And companies still wouldn't be happy with this ridiculous limit case, they'd still want a greater share of your attention and wallet. You, us, individually, mean nothing except a source of coins.

If we want to mean anything to ourselves, defence against the dark arts is necessary.

The psychological marketing tricks to make a thing more attractive is also a value add.

The psychological marketing tricks to make a thing more attractive is abusive and parasitic. Ideal brains would search for what they need, and buy the most fitting thing. Human brains which can be manipulated are a weakness we all share - and we should all be kind enough not to abuse this fact of each other any more than we have to.

Re: Google Will Stop Reading Your Emails for Gmail Ads

#387

Post by newscracker »

Slightly off topic: I was very annoyed that this article didn't provide any links to Google's official statement/declaration about this change and when it's coming. Even if Bloomberg interviewed Diane Green for this article or asked questions and got official statements, it could've still provided an official link for the change.

I found the link [1] here on HN.

[1]: https://blog.google/products/gmail/g-suite-gains-traction-in...

Re: Google Will Stop Reading Your Emails for Gmail Ads

#388

Post by jodrellblank »

oh_sigh wrote: post #76
roywiggins wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The spam filter is for my benefit, but scanning for ad keywords is designed to benefit someone else, not me.

Ads benefit both you and the other group that they connect you. You finding out about, say, a product you are interested benefits you.

http://www.talkingnewmedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ou...

http://moneyinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/nypostoutbrai...

Benefitting. You.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B2044DNCEAAHmu-.png

The next time you want to buy, say, 9 celebs in open relationships.

http://www.cpawealthacademy.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/R...

This is what ads are. This is what we adblock. This is clickbait, lies, manipulation, visually distracting, space wasting, untrustworthy, barrel scraping garbage.

"Ads inform you about products" in the same way slime mould informs you that your house is too damp. The best individual course of action is not to buy what the mould is selling.

Post reply on HN