Valeri Galtsev wrote:
<snip>
<agree on being interested in the calander, etc, info>
> <rant>
> As far as google anything goes, not everybody volunteers one's
> information into paws of google (and quite likely one or more of 3 letter
> agencies collecting information that way). I know (call it educated guess)
> that about 70% of messages I send are ending up in google databases
> whether I want it or not. Someone said quite some time ago: you don't need
> to recruit spies anymore, just roll out "free" services, and information
> will trickle to you. I am old enough to know what collection of
> information on everybody leads to (Hitler Germany, Stalin Russia, ...),
> but I also know that the worst lesson of history is: people do not learn
> lessons of history. So, I do the best I can do: roll out services people I
> work for may need, and avoid by any means advertising google whatever
> myself, I just keep neutral when that surfaces in discussions with my
> people. </rant>
>
Yep. That's why I refuse to have a google account, and why I recommended
against it for business use. I have no knowledge, but even if you pay
google for a "private" business account, I have next to no trust that they
do not have something scanning for info to sell, or market to - we all
*know* they do that to all free email accounts.
"First, do no harm"? Long gone, eaten by their marketing dept, which is
why the signal-to-noise ratio has gone *way* down in the laft five years.
I'll stop the rant now, too, it's OT for the list.
mark