[p2p-research] "Many of us will not send mail to gmail.com"

Mon May 11 03:30:03 CEST 2009

I'm also with Ryan on this. I love my Gmail.

Had a quick look at http://gmail-is-too-creepy.com/ - it seems to blatantly
misinterpret Google's motto to make them seem much worse than they are.

*Google, you may recall, already believes that as a corporation they are
utterly incapable of bad faith. Their corporate motto is "Don't be evil,"
*
At the risk of being obvious, you don't need to set yourself the aim "Don't
be evil" if it's actually impossible to be evil.

One valid point tho:
*
If Google builds a database of keywords associated with email addresses, the
potential for abuse is staggering.*

Potential for abuse is worth being careful about. I don't expect Google to
do anything bad, but we don't know. This kind of thing always reminds me of
how the Nazis used census data to identify Jews etc after they invaded the
Netherlands. The Dutch govt presumably never envisaged the data being used
in this way.

It's not enough to make me concerned, but I were involved with activities
that certain government agencies or corporations strongly disapproved of,
I'd think about starting to use Scroogle for search, a different mail
provider/program, and other non-Google services.

Chris

On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 23:51, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:

> yes by all means, efforts should continue, though I expect that it will be
> extremely difficult to overcome the network benefits accrued by google ..
>
> Michel
>
> On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 1:47 PM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> There is no way for a data center, no matter how large it is, to match
>> the storage capacity of a fully redundant p2p storage architecture, so
>> your email can be stored in the p2p cloud, in geographically
>> always-redundant manner. Obviously, with each new paradigm there are
>> challenges that get worked out over time and with accumulation of
>> expertise.
>>
>> I disagree with the notion that just because Google makes it
>> convenient that we should stop the process of creative destruction
>> that is so essential to growth.
>>
>> So there is a stark disagreement here centering around convenience vs
>> principle (or more specifically your convenience and my principle)
>>
>> hope that helps.
>>
>> Marc
>>
>> On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 11:28 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > I'll second wholeheartedly this explanation by Ryan,
>> >
>> > especially for non-tech oriented people like myself, we want to drive
>> the
>> > car, but are not interested in knowledge about the motor.
>> >
>> > Gmail has by far the most interesting ecology of services, it is what
>> made
>> > the crucial difference that losing my laptop without backup wasn't
>> actually
>> > a catastrophe, because my material is available through the gmail
>> archive.
>> > Centralization is not inherently worse in terms of robustness. Full p2p
>> > architectures would have their own problems.
>> >
>> > I've yet to encounter, at 51 years of age, my first real problem with
>> > privacy, and have never clicked on an online ad, as far as I can
>> remember.
>> >
>> > We have to use products from capitalist enterprises for almost
>> everything we
>> > do, I don't see gmail being different essentially from buying a
>> > corporate-made hifi station.
>> >
>> > There are many struggles to be fought, and gmail is an efficient tool to
>> > communicate,
>> >
>> > Google is a netarchical capitalist, part shark, these practices are
>> > negative, part dolphin, it has to enable our social cooperation, that is
>> > positive; we have to learn to distinguish, using whatever can help our
>> cause
>> > and human cooperation.
>> >
>> > Michel
>> >
>> > On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Marco,
>> >>
>> >> Gmail is a function rich, highly secure, free service (for seeing some
>> >> ads...which to my ways of thinking is a good deal if not pure free).
>> It
>> >> gives me huge amounts of free disk space, free file support etc.
>> Someone
>> >> may be paying, but it isn't me.  And I disagree with Marc that these
>> >> services are inherently expensive to society.  Corporations can be
>> quite
>> >> efficient, and I believe Google is so, bye and large.
>> >>
>> >> I've long ago given up on strong expectations of privacy.  What do I
>> have
>> >> to hide that isn't inherently coded and defended by other service
>> providers
>> >> (e.g. banks) anyway?
>> >>
>> >> I love GMAIL and recommend it continually--over the years I've probably
>> >> put 200 people on it.  I've used many a university system, and am
>> forced to
>> >> use the hated MS Outlook at the office.  I can get my mail anywhere on
>> the
>> >> planet, be relatively confident that it will be available, that people
>> won't
>> >> miss spell my provider / host, etc. I might add that I am fiercely pro
>> Open
>> >> Net, Open Architecture, etc.  That said, my house has Linux computers,
>> a Mac
>> >> and even MS Windows XP.
>> >>
>> >> In gmail I can also chat with many friends within it, link it to my
>> >> calendar, carry on video (when my Sony is willing) and find many of
>> their
>> >> lab features such as embedded search, etc. extremely useful.
>> >>
>> >> As I have said, I'm not a political zealot for P2P.  It isn't an
>> >> idealism--it is, to me, a ethos.  I recognize it as a valuable set of
>> ideas
>> >> whose time has come.  If its time passes, I'll shed no tears and will
>> be on
>> >> to the next most moral and productive
>> ethos/approach/system/architecture.  I
>> >> do believe there are reasons to think P2P represents the most stable
>> form of
>> >> social relationships given a certain level of technology
>> infrastructure.  I
>> >> believe it is compatible with any range of political and economic
>> systems
>> >> simultaneously to existing on its own--and P2P systems from China to
>> Sri
>> >> Lanka to New York City prove that to me.
>> >>
>> >> Give me a free/easy, stable, feature equal or similar facility on P2P
>> and
>> >> I'll be there tomorrow (or even today).  I could probably solve the
>> problem
>> >> for myself given enough time and effort, but my time is valuable to me
>> to
>> >> use in other ways.  I'd gladly donate money to an Apache-like
>> organization
>> >> to solve email through some other mechanism, but short of that, I don't
>> have
>> >> any moral issues at all using Gmail or any Google product.  Google Maps
>> is
>> >> superior in my view to competitors, so is their search.  I've shared
>> many
>> >> documents with it, and I like their innovations.
>> >>
>> >> Wordpress is far superior to Blogger.  When I blog, I use Wordpress,
>> which
>> >> is more conventionally open/non-profit.  On the other hand, I
>> personally
>> >> find Google to be more ethical in its governance, employee treatment,
>> public
>> >> positions, etc. than most firms.  I really have no issues at all in
>> >> supporting/using them.  That said, when something better or freer
>> matches
>> >> it, I'd be quick to switch.  If P2P adapts a radical anti-market
>> posture, it
>> >> will fail.
>> >>
>> >> Ryan Lanham
>> >> rlanham1963 at gmail.com
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 10:47 AM, M. Fioretti <mfioretti at nexaima.net>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> There is a question I asked yesterday in the "p2p email" thread that
>> >>> went lost in the discussion, so I thought it could be interesting /
>> >>> worthwhile to make a new thread of it. Yesterday I wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> > What I've been sincerely wondering for months now is how it's
>> >>> > possible that a p2p-research and advocacy list, of all places, has
>> >>> > so many members "running" their own email with gmail, that is in the
>> >>> > way which is as far as possible from P2P ideals and suggested
>> >>> > practices, a way which relies on one huge provider with bunches of
>> >>> > large, very centrally managed data centers. I'm on tenths of lists
>> >>> > and the percentage of gmail addresses among, say, the 20/30% most
>> >>> > active users is far higher here than in any other of them.
>> >>>
>> >>> Another reason not to use centralized providers is privacy. The
>> >>> subject of this email is a quote from http://gmail-is-too-creepy.com/
>> ,
>> >>> which I invite everybody to read carefully, even if with a mandatory
>> >>> disclaimer:
>> >>>
>> >>>      the style of that whole website is a bit too much dramatic for
>> >>>      my taste, and above all it seems stuck to ~5 years ago. I don't
>> >>>      use Gmail, so I don't know if the reason is that the webmaster
>> >>>      was too busy to update the page or that the situation hasn't
>> >>>      changed.
>> >>>
>> >>> But even if there are many specific informations which are outdated
>> >>> now, I believe the gist of the page is still quite a valid summary of
>> >>> all the privacy related reasons why one should avoid Gmail or any
>> >>> other global email provider.
>> >>>
>> >>> So why do so many subscribers of a list like this, ie people
>> >>> interested in P2P-ness and, often, also in civil rights issues, use
>> >>> Gmail?
>> >>>
>> >>>        Marco Fioretti
>> >>> --
>> >>> Your own civil rights and the quality of your life heavily depend on
>> how
>> >>> software is used *around* you:
>> http://digifreedom.net/node/84
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> p2presearch mailing list
>> >>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> >>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> p2presearch mailing list
>> >> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> >> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
>> > http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
>> > http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>> >
>> > Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
>> > http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
>> > http://p2pfoundation.ning.com
>> >
>> > Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>> >
>> > The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
>> > http://www.shiftn.com/
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > p2presearch mailing list
>> > p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> > http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Marc Fawzi
>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>
> Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
> http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
> http://p2pfoundation.ning.com
>
> Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>
> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
> http://www.shiftn.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>

-- 
Chris Watkins

Appropedia.org - Sharing knowledge to build rich, sustainable lives.

identi.ca/appropedia / twitter.com/appropedia
blogs.appropedia.org

I like this: five.sentenc.es
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090510/59497a7e/attachment-0001.html>