5 ms·

They do that only for the purpose of delivering the mail safely. Not to further their own arbitrary business interests.

by gibwell 13y ago

bandushrew 13y ago
what? no, almost everything I mentioned do it to further their own business interests. Mostly by offering value to their customers in the form of added services. Google do it to allow themselves to provide a free email service. Without the scanning of email done by google, everyone would have to pay for their email services. You may or may not like the trade off, but apparently MANY people would prefer to have a free email service that provides advertising over a paid for email service that does not.
- judk 13y ago
  If you read the article, you will learn that the issue is that users were not made aware of the tradeoff.
- dingaling 13y ago
  > Without the scanning of email done by google, everyone would have to pay for their email services. On reflection I think that would be a good thing. At present > 95% of Google's revenue comes from advertising. Thousands of staff are involved in designing and implementing 'improved' advertising systems. Millions of hours are consumed by this every year. If Google was forced to transition to a subscription service for Gmail it might force a general shift in their revenue model. I contend all that brain power could be redeployed to doing amazing things, rather than refining AdWords .
  - bandushrew 13y ago
    maybe, but whether or not their business model is good for mankind, is really not the topic of discussion here...
- gibwell 13y ago
  This argument has already been rejected by the judge. Wiretappimg doesn't suddenly become permissible just because it permits an arbitrary business model that happens to pay for the service. If we say analyzing your communication is ok as long as it makes money for the service provider and the service is free, we open a Pandora's box. Google (and anyone operating an SMTP server) would be able to sell HR reports to recruiters, insurability scores to insurers, predictions of criminality to police departments, infidelity scores to private detectives, etc. Advertising is not a specially protected business model.
  - bandushrew 13y ago
    if we say it is not ok, then it is not possible to have technology that looks at the content of email for delivery purposes. thus virus checkers, deep packet inspection and firewalls instantly become unavailable.
Oletros 13y ago
> They do that only for the purpose of delivering the mail safely. Not to further their own arbitrary business interests. Intent is irrelevant, if one is wiretapping then the other is also wiretapping
- gibwell 13y ago
  Where do you get the idea that intent is irrelevant? That's certainly not a general legal principle.

They do that only for the purpose of delivering the mail safely. Not to further their own arbitrary business interests.

by gibwell 13y ago

They do that only for the purpose of delivering the mail safely. Not to further their own arbitrary business interests.

what? no, almost everything I mentioned do it to further their own business interests. Mostly by offering value to their customers in the form of added services. Google do it to allow themselves to provide a free email service. Without the scanning of email done by google, everyone would have to pay for their email services. You may or may not like the trade off, but apparently MANY people would prefer to have a free email service that provides advertising over a paid for email service that does not.

judk 13y ago
If you read the article, you will learn that the issue is that users were not made aware of the tradeoff.
dingaling 13y ago
> Without the scanning of email done by google, everyone would have to pay for their email services. On reflection I think that would be a good thing. At present > 95% of Google's revenue comes from advertising. Thousands of staff are involved in designing and implementing 'improved' advertising systems. Millions of hours are consumed by this every year. If Google was forced to transition to a subscription service for Gmail it might force a general shift in their revenue model. I contend all that brain power could be redeployed to doing amazing things, rather than refining AdWords .
- bandushrew 13y ago
  maybe, but whether or not their business model is good for mankind, is really not the topic of discussion here...
gibwell 13y ago
This argument has already been rejected by the judge. Wiretappimg doesn't suddenly become permissible just because it permits an arbitrary business model that happens to pay for the service. If we say analyzing your communication is ok as long as it makes money for the service provider and the service is free, we open a Pandora's box. Google (and anyone operating an SMTP server) would be able to sell HR reports to recruiters, insurability scores to insurers, predictions of criminality to police departments, infidelity scores to private detectives, etc. Advertising is not a specially protected business model.
- bandushrew 13y ago
  if we say it is not ok, then it is not possible to have technology that looks at the content of email for delivery purposes. thus virus checkers, deep packet inspection and firewalls instantly become unavailable.

Oletros 13y ago

> They do that only for the purpose of delivering the mail safely. Not to further their own arbitrary business interests. Intent is irrelevant, if one is wiretapping then the other is also wiretapping

gibwell 13y ago
Where do you get the idea that intent is irrelevant? That's certainly not a general legal principle.