This site will look much better in a web browser that supports web standards. Click here for more information. Regardless, it is still accessible to any browser or Internet device. It just won't look nearly as pretty. :)

Cultivation:
Bhavatu sabba mangalam.
"May all beings be happy."
Vipassana meditation.
www.dhamma.org
Huh?
• Who: Eric Case FOAF
• What: Weblog (Archive | Atom)
• Where: Woodside, CA, USA
• Work: Google/Blogger
• More: Photos/Referrers
← Moblog: @ BuzzNet (XML)
• Materialism: To be consumed

Reading blogs at work? Click to escape to a suitable site!
Latest Project:
del.icio.us (XML):
Latest photos (XML):
2004/03/25: Newsweek
2004/01/31: Alpine
2004/01/30: Squaw Valley
2004/01/29: Squaw Valley
2003/12/31: Commute
Comments
Dead tree (XML):
completed | queue | current:

Search:

Upcoming (profile):
Latest comments:
natalie on "Little Wanganui"
Ryan on "Little Wanganui"
Alex on "Little Wanganui"
Chuck on "cape foulwind sunset"
Chuck on "Little Wanganui"
Recently on NetFlix (XML):
10/2004: A Passage to India
8/2004: City of God8/2004: The Bourne Identity
6/2004: Himalaya
5/2004: The Trials of Henry Kissinger
Recently on iTunes:
Miscellaneous:
BlogRolling:
« Microloans Rock! | Main | Battelle's on fi-ya! »

April 13, 2004

Gmail*

First, Brandon articulates how many of us feel:

"In any case, I would think that most of these issues come down to trust: do you trust Google or not? Has Google ever done anything that made you not trust them? Do you believe the Google "do no evil"? As someone on the inside who's seen the code and heard the open discussions amoung the employees, I do. But don't take my word for it, look at our record and make your own decision."
Then, Owen from the Business 2.0 blog proposes something startling:
"Alarmed by the privacy implications of having ads automatically served up by software programs alongside your email? Here's a wild idea: Don't use it."
I would add, "until you've given it a test drive first." Owen was responding to this article from The Telegraph which has quite a few gems, like:
"Gmail users who discuss their ailments, for instance, may find themselves bombarded with promotions from drug manufacturers. Google makes revenue from the advertisers."
Take a look at this screenshot from my Gmail inbox, from the latest 12-inch Powerbook digest:
Gmail
I'm certainly not feeling bombarded by those subtle, clearly-marked, relevant ads along the right, are you? And what about the Yahoo Groups ads embedded in the actual email? Yuck!

While copying and pasting from this Telegraph article, I happened to mouse over the ugly, irrelevant banner ad at the top when I was bombarded by this monstrosity:

ugly banner ad
I had no idea this would happen, the ad is now taking up more than half my screen, and it's entirely unrelated to the content on the page. It's trying to deceive me into clicking, but I just want it to go away! Let's continue:
"California senator Liz Figueroa, who was behind the successful Do Not Call legislation that hampered telephone marketers, called Gmail 'an invasion of privacy.' She is drawing up a law that could block the scheme or force Google to overhaul its offering. 'We are asking them to rethink the whole product. It's like having a massive billboard in the middle of your home,' she said.
I don't know about you, but the Sponsored Links in my screenshot don't look like a massive billboard to me. In fact, they're actually helpful. The hideous, unexpected ad on the Telegraph's site, on the other hand, is most definitely a billboard: big, obnoxious and distracting. Yahoo's sites and Microsoft's Hotmail are (mostly) billboards, imho. Your television is a massive billboard. AdWords are not. We continue:
"Michael Allison, of the Internet Crimes Group in New Jersey, said: 'Google could create a potential monster - people with wicked ways could use it for everything from extortion to harassment.'"
Isn't this true of just about everything ever invented? Well, maybe not Q-tips, but you get my point. More:
"Internet aficionados seem split between those who compare Gmail to the postman opening up private mail and those who think individuals should be left to choose whether to sign up or not."
Email in Google's Gmail isn't read by humans- it's read by software algorithms, just like spam filters and spellcheckers. And unless email is encrypted, it's essentially like sending postcards.

My advice: Read about Gmail from people who've actually used it, including those who (rightfully) criticize it. Try it out once it's been released, then make an educated decision based on your own knowledge and experience. I've been using it for a long time, and I think it's one of the most revolutionary email applications ever created. And it's still in beta!

Further reading:

* Standard disclaimers apply: all this is my own personal opinion, yadda yadda

Posted at 21:44
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://vedana.net/mt/mt-tb.cgi/749

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Gmail*' from vedana.net.
Google's Gmail - An in-depth look
Excerpt: REALLY curious about Gmail? Check out point-by-point commentary on Gmail features and functionality! :)
Weblog: BLADAM: Musings on life, love, liberty, and stuff
Tracked: April 14, 2004 09:07 PM