No such thing as a free lunch? and if you find one, why moan about the crisps?

[Rob]

Am I required to read the terms and conditions of EVERY mail service provider operating a mail account to which I might wish to send mail to ensure that they won't be eavesdropping on confidential data for commercial purposes?

Gentlemen - The Crux!

[telfer12000]

It might well be the Crux but, call me old fashioned, I don't ever send confidential data in email without encryption unless I can quantify and live with the risk of the data being intercepted.

The problem is that we are all living in an ever developing 'nanny' society in which the state, through legislation, regulation and the constant intercession of civil rights pressure groups and minority interest lobbyists, acts as protector for the poor buggers who unable or unwilling to take responsibility for their own actions. Don't mean to be harsh but there is no such thing as a free lunch and I too am sick of endless streams of bleeding hearts claiming that they've been denied their civil rights or have been fooled by some unscrupulous individual or company.

CAVEAT EMPTOR.

[Stoo]

Encrypt the bugger

[fall-apart]

Saying it's free and "well, you don't have to use it" are false arguments, they don't solve the issue at hand, they just hide it out of sight.

Why are those false arguments? The essence of a free-market economy is choice. You have the choice to use or not use Gmail. Also, the ads seem to be the sort of thing that other companies also include, but targetted. It's not going to blank out the name of your company and put in a competitors ad. See the picture below.

[ninjastyle]

Good point, but the same could be said when you send a customer a HEXUS review link and they see competitors links on HEXUS. Yet again; why should they do it? Or how about when they go to a site which has Google AdSense adverts which also look at keywords.

It is a balance but at the end of the day it is up to the consumer - the trouble is everyone expects everything for nothing.

Get this - the Corsair Giveaway, I recieved several emails of hate mail from people who got the mailshots. Nothing wrong with what we did, we were notifying you about the new HEXUS situation. We are not in breach of the Data Protection Act, and we reserve the right to send Admin email shots. But we are not forcing people to do anything, just inviting them.

Hate mail!!? Man I would love to win a gig of Corsair, hence my entry to the comp. 1 GB of Corsair that'd really help me out, I don't see what there is to moan about with an offer such as that!

[nichomach]

Why are those false arguments? The essence of a free-market economy is choice. You have the choice to use or not use Gmail. Also, the ads seem to be the sort of thing that other companies also include, but targetted.

No, the essence of an unregulated free market economy is lack of choice; do people buy PCs with Windows XP preloaded because it's the best operating system? One that they've made an informed choice to buy? No, they buy them because that's what they get given and they get given those because one company has leveraged its position in operating systems and applications to the point that even if you were to demand a PC without Windows from a major manufacturer, and get one, the cost of a license for an operating system which you would never use is still included in the purchase price.

Google are assuming that they have a ready-made client base of suckers whom they can sell to as many businesses as they like, leveraging their ubiquity in search engine presence to do so. They're correct in that assumption, and what they are doing is legal, but it prejudices the privacy, not necessarily of those who sign up to that service, but of anyone who communicates with those people.

[andrewuk]

Damn right dude. Although I have to admit I've been known to just tick the yes box on occasion

[telfer12000]

A regulated free market economy will, in most cases in most markets, increase the number of choices for the consumer but it will not always offer the consumer the most advantageous choice.

What is wrong with Microsoft's and Google's approach? (since Nichomach lumped them together)

I am old enough to remember the pre-PC world and I get really irritated by the 'big business' knockers who feel that they have been shafted by, for example, the evil Gates and his cronies into operating personal computers using Microsoft OSs when they could be so pure and innocent by using open and extendible alternative OSs or by being offered a choice of several OSs from different providers.

Quantity of choice does not always equate to quality of choice.

Does Google see their client base as suckers? Not in my view.

Are Google and Hexus, come to think about it, pseudo-academic/charitable institutions who offer their freeservices for the good of mankind - absolutely not.

In what way does Google's plans really differ markedly from the Red Sheriff et al tracking cookie strategies which have been around for years?

Does it bother me, as a potential Google mail client third party, that any mail to Google '1G' customers will be scanned for content?

Not in the slightest. Nor does it bother me that Hexus invited me to win some 'free' RAM in order to establish a stronger more loyal customer base.

If it’s personal mail and you don’t what someone (other than the recipient to read it) then use encryption.

[nichomach]

A regulated free market economy will, in most cases in most markets, increase the number of choices for the consumer but it will not always offer the consumer the most advantageous choice.

This is a nonsensical statement; since increasing the number of choices available will intrinsically include a notional most advantageous choice, how can it not? I'd point out that most of the lack of choice forced upon the consumer (certainly in the IT field) has been brought about by the failure to enforce in timely fashion such regulation as did exist. A case in point; Netscape won the court cases, but judgement was delivered too late to stop the leveraging of the nascent MS operating system monopoly to grant them de facto browser dominance. It wasn't that the MS product was better (it wasn't); it was simply that MS used not only unlawful subsidy, but unlawful product tying to secure that dominance (if you shipped Windows, you had no choice but to ship IE as the default browser). That's the unregulated free market in effect for you. The same lack of enforcement allowed MS to use undocumented APIs in the Windows OS to give advantages to their office suite over competitor products - so now everyone uses MS Office. Good examples of how lack of regulation ends up enforcing lack of choice on the consumer.

What is wrong with Microsoft's and Google's approach? (since Nichomach lumped them together)

You have to ask? See above.

I am old enough to remember the pre-PC world

So am I; wasn't that where we had innovation, as opposed to monopoly?

and I get really irritated by the 'big business' knockers who feel that they have been shafted by, for example, the evil Gates and his cronies into operating personal computers using Microsoft OSs when they could be so pure and innocent by using open and extendible alternative OSs or by being offered a choice of several OSs from different providers.

No, I get annoyed by people who spout the Gates party line even though MS have been convicted on multiple occasions of unlawful business practices that have harmed the interests of the consumer. Would it be so terrible to be offered a choice of OSes? Apparently so; just look at what happens when you launch a competitor product like Lindows. It's a little stuffy in here; excuse me while I open the *BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP...MICROSOFT TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT ALERT* oops .

Quantity of choice does not always equate to quality of choice.

But enforced lack of choice handily removes the obligation to provide quality to begin with.

Does Google see their client base as suckers? Not in my view.

But apparently in your view, less choice is more choice, and we don't need our poor wittle brains confused by the possibility of ACTUALLY USING A DIFFERENT OPERATING SYSTEM...so I don't necessarily regard your view as authoritative.

Are Google and Hexus, come to think about it, pseudo-academic/charitable institutions who offer their freeservices for the good of mankind - absolutely not.

Who asked them to be? The difference is that Hexus is a closed system that simply doesn't accept posting unless and until you consciously register with it and consciously accept the T's & C's. By contrast, Gmail is a system which invites others to communicate with it without asking them to consent to the T's & C's, yet treats their information precisely as though they had consented (i.e. even though they have not waived any entitlement to privacy, their communications cease to be private). Do you REALLY fail to appreciate the difference?

In what way does Google's plans really differ markedly from the Red Sheriff et al tracking cookie strategies which have been around for years?

You can turn off cookies. Easily.

Does it bother me, as a potential Google mail client third party, that any mail to Google '1G' customers will be scanned for content?

Not in the slightest.

Your choice; but anyone who mails you doesn't GET a choice.

Nor does it bother me that Hexus invited me to win some 'free' RAM in order to establish a stronger more loyal customer base.

Not comparable for the reasons outlined above.

[myth]

WOW! That post was so big it didn't even fit on my 20 inch LCD! 1600 x 1200 res! I'm impressed

[telfer12000]

Nichomach, please take what I am about to write as a complement, having witnessed your formidable debating skills on many occasions on these boards, I think we should agree to disagree (pleeeeese) because I simply don’t have the time to engage in a long debate at this time.

In response to a couple of your points (which are beginning to move off David’s original topic):

I don't think that there is a contradiction in terms when I state that an increase in the number of choices the consumer has will not always lead to an offering of the most advantageous choice.

For me, and I am happy to concede that this is my personal view, the single greatest step forward for mankind in the last twenty years has been the arrival of a personal computer in most homes. I do not believe that the PC would have arrived in all our homes in such a short timeframe without MS because, despite their many faults, Microsoft have been instrumental in taking the horrors of technology (for most users) and packaging/selling it at the lowest common denominator to all. For most users, the PC operating system is and will remain a dark art and whilst there have been many alternative providers who have come and gone along the way with, I concede, better products the ‘enforced standard’ of the Windows OS has put PCs where they are today.

If regulation and legislation had arrived in IT at an earlier time it is possible that we would not be as advanced in terms of the PC masses because MS would have been regulated out of the market and, from my perspective, the more people who have access to this most wonderful invention which I am typing on at the moment the better. You might suggest that progress would have been faster without MS and I am happy to agree to disagree on this point. I do not spout the Gates party line but I respect what he and his chums have done whilst not always agreeing with their methods.

I fully understand and appreciate your perspective in relation to the potential infringement of your privacy using the new Google service but whilst I would defend your right to your privacy I am personally prepared to forego some of my rights if I think this will lead to progress and innovation either directly or indirectly. The choice to forego my rights is my choice which I hope you will allow me? As I mentioned in an earlier post, I don’t use non-encrypted email for personal or confidential matters.

I do “REALLY” appreciate the difference – honestly I do and I respect your right to privacy. You are correct when you state that I can turn off cookies easily but I bet 95% of the user community don’t even know what a cookie is.

You imply that I am a paternalist when you state that “we don’t need our poor wittle brains confused….” and I have to put my hands up and accept that this is true. I am sure that you and I and most of the people reading the Hexus boards are more than capable of making our own minds up in relation to which technology to use (no doubt we all use whichever OS takes our fancy) but my seventy year old mum and my many sisters and other non-techie friends don’t need or necessarily want OS choice. The PC is not their entire world, it is a skill which it took them years to understand and use effectively even at a basic level at c. 10 minutes a week.

I think that the great and good of this industry arguing about OS standards in the late ‘80s and ‘90s and then offering the average PC user a choice of multiple operating systems would have denied or delayed access to this wonderful invention for millions.

I am sure you can write with greater authority than I can in relation to the lack of regulation in the IT industry but in my specialist area of financial services I can state with absolute authority that the ever increasing impact of regulation will lead to nothing but a reduction in consumer choice and I believe that had regulation arrived in IT at an earlier stage of its development then we wouldn’t be where we are today.

All the above is just my opinion it is not meant to be authoritive but thanks for telling me that it is not authoritive just in case I harboured any illusions

[Angus]

If people are going to bring up the Windows vs anything else arguement I'll say this...

I've been using Windows since 3.1 - I'm used to it. My current setup software wise is windows XP with MS Office. I use outlook as my mail client, word as my word processor etc.

I use Microsoft, because I think it's the best out there.

I've tried Firebird, Mozilla, Netscape, Thunderbird. I used to love lotus smartsuite, but they don't seem to publish it anymore. I've even tried deleting windows and installing Linux.

But every time I end up back where I started, using windows. If you go back a few years Microsoft stuff was buggy. They have grown and as far as I have experienced, the quality has improved I don't even remember the last time I saw a BSOD. Everyone else is much smaller, and as far as I've experienced, the quality hasn't been so good and/or it's lacked features.

So at the end of the day it all boils down to what, and not how much you want to pay.

If you don't pay in £ then you'll be paying in lost productivity.