| Pages in topic: < [1 2] | Changing email address to an ISP-independent address Thread poster: Rebecca Hendry
|
|---|
EHI (X)
Local time: 10:50
| proven wrong | Oct 14, 2008 |
Well, it seems I've been proven wrong.
I will reconsider
| | | |
Lutz Molderings wrote: Well, it seems I've been proven wrong. I will reconsider
Nobody has proved anything:-)
The main argument against free email addresses in the other thread was that they are anonymous.
On the other hand, one could argue that going to the bother of paying for a domain which is allegedly based on your own name proves nothing. I could pick any plausible sounding name I liked, set up a website and rip people off left, right and centre, all for an outlay of much less than £100.
Dallas Cao's argument in this thread that they are, at least, super reliable, should not be overlooked, I think.
To be honest, I am not sure what message is sent by an individual who insists on paying for something which is available with higher QoS free of charge.
FWIW, I've got my own website (although you'll have to take my word for it that it is mine) and I use a gmail address, which is where website email is forwarded to. Easy!
| | | | EHI (X)
Local time: 10:50
| don't get it | Oct 14, 2008 |
I don't get it.
Why am I more anonymous if I send you an email from my Gmail account than if I send you one from [email protected]?
If you want to send an anonymous email and don't know how to do it yourself simply type "send anonymous email" into Google and send an anonymous email (from whichever address you fancy).
... See more I don't get it.
Why am I more anonymous if I send you an email from my Gmail account than if I send you one from [email protected]?
If you want to send an anonymous email and don't know how to do it yourself simply type "send anonymous email" into Google and send an anonymous email (from whichever address you fancy).
http://www.sendanonymousemail.net/
An email address tells you nothing about whether a person is out to cheat you.
[Edited at 2008-10-14 09:33]
[Edited at 2008-10-14 09:35] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | I take it back | Oct 15, 2008 |
Lutz Molderings wrote:
An email address tells you nothing about whether a person is out to cheat you.
Lutz is right. I take back what I have said about hotmail or yahoo mails. It's so unfair and I regret having said it.
By the way, this guy using yahoo.com mail cheated many people including me:
http://www.proz.com/forum/money_matters/110504-if_you_want_to_get_paid.html
Of course, this single incident doesn't mean that yahoo mails look less professional than gmail.com.
| | |
|
|
|
| Gmail says to me: "I don't care about privacy" | Oct 15, 2008 |
Dallas Cao wrote:
But I always trust gmail.
I'd encourage those of you who are so enthusiastic about gmail to find out a bit more about their privacy policies, for instance:
http://www.gmail-is-too-creepy.com/
http://epic.org/privacy/gmail/faq.html
An excerpt:
1.3 What privacy risks are presented by Gmail?
a. Non-Subscribers Do Not Consent to "Content Extraction." Subscribers consent to "content extraction" and analysis of their e-mail ("We serve highly relevant ads and other information as part of the service using our unique content-targeting technology," according to the privacy policy). But non-subscribers who are e-mailing a Gmail user have not consented, and indeed may not even be aware that their communications are being analyzed or that a profile may being compiled on him or her. (See 2.3 "Will Google Build Profiles of Subscribers and/or Non-subscribers?")
b. Unlimited Data Retention. While the prospect of never having to delete or file an e-mail is an attractive feature for space-hungry users, the implications of indefinite storage of e-mail communications presents several serious implications. Although Google has is held in high esteem by the public as a good corporate citizen, past performance is no guarantee of future behavior -- especially following Google's IPO when the company will have a legal duty to maximize shareholder wealth. Although Google currently says that they will not record the "concepts" extracted from scanned e-mails, they could decide to do so in the future and thereby create detailed profiles of users. Building such profiles on years of past communication in addition to current communications is made easier if users never delete e-mails. Additionally, communications stored for more than 180 days are exposed to lower protections from law enforcement access; with Gmail, many such e-mails could be made easily available to police.
c. Profiling Across Google Product Line. Google uses cookies to track users (and preserve preference across sessions) on the Google search engine. Gmail also uses cookies. Google's personal information-rich social networking service, Orkut, does as well. Although Google said that it does not cross-reference the cookies, nothing is stopping them from doing so at any time ("It might be really useful for us to know that information. I'd hate to rule anything like that out," said Google co-founder Larry Page). Google retains a powerful ability to create incredibly detailed profiles on users, whether or not they do so today: e-mail addresses and "concept" information about a persons's friends, family and co-workers; the daily search terms typed into Google; and myriad personal information provided to Orkut. The Gmail privacy policy explicitly allows such uses: "Google may share cookie information among its other services for the purpose of providing you a better experience." (See also 2.3 "Will Google Build Profiles of Subscribers and/or Non-subscribers?") Additionally, Google has extremely long cookie expiration dates that preserve the cookie until the year 2038 (see 1.5 What other things has Google been doing that might affect my privacy?)
d. Bad Legal Precedent. In the United States, violations of privacy with respect to the Fourth Amendment are based partly on whether the person had a legitimate expectation of privacy. If a major online e-mail provider such as Google is allowed to monitor private communications -- even in an automated way -- the expectations of e-mail privacy may be eroded. That is, courts may consider the service as evidence of a lack of a reasonable expectation in e-mail. Businesses and government organizations may thus find it easier to legally monitor e-mail communications. These effects are long-term and will undoubtedly outlive Google.
e. Insufficient Privacy Policy. Google can transfer all of the information, including any profiles created, if and when it is merged or sold ("We reserve the right to transfer your personal information in the event of a transfer of ownership of Google, such as acquisition by or merger with another company".) Also, Google can make unilateral changes to the policy and unless it deems them "significant," it may not even notify users ("If we make any significant changes to this policy, we will notify you by posting a notice of such changes on the Gmail login page.") Finally, as outlined above, the policy regarding retention is very broad: "...residual copies of e-mail may remain on our systems for some time, even after you have deleted messages from your mailbox or after the termination of your account." (These and the rest of the references to the privacy policy are based on the 6/28/2004 version.)
| | | | EHI (X)
Local time: 10:50
|
Lutz Molderings wrote:
But who says myhostingprovider.com is any better?
And what about Hotmail and Yahoo?
Indeed, I was about to say something similar.
While I see what Michele means, I take some comfort in the fact that clearly a number of bodies are watching google like hawks.
Which is perhaps less likely to be the case for, say, Walla.
Just an idea.
Personally, I very much doubt that it is possible to have complete confidence in email security unless you are running your own email server.
Other than that, I trust all of them equally little, and, as I say, in that case, I may as well use one that is being closely watched
Should this really be of any concern to me, a freelance translator? I don't now, it certainly doesn't bother me. I simply assume our regulatory authorities will take action should these companies be breaching our privacy laws - which, no doubt, they do.
While I am inclined to think that there are some people who use the "c" word as a defence against anything that does not chime with how they like to do things, I think it is undeniable that there are potentially concerns about emailing confidential documents.
The thing is, I also think those concerns apply no matter what email system you use.
And God help you if you use a wireless connection....
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Changing email address to an ISP-independent address | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
| | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
