Re: Personal Recommendations for Free List Compatible Email Service
On Wednesday 23 April 2014 13:22:25 Henning Follmann wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:04:31PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > On Tue, 22 Apr 2014, Henning Follmann wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 09:47:24AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 22 Apr 2014, Henning Follmann wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 10:25:18AM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, 21 Apr 2014, Xiánwén Chén wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Patrick,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Why not just a second Gmail account for various lists?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That was the first thing I considered, but didn't want to be a
> > > > > > part of Google+ and all that social networking crap Google
> > > > > > pushes on gmail applicants.
> > > > >
> > > > > I do not know what you are expecting.
> > > >
> > > > I didn't want all the headaches of Google+ (something I'll NEVER use
> > > > or participate in) just for an email account.
> > > >
> > > > > Free does not exist. There is always a price.
> > > >
> > > > It was a price I was unwilling to pay.
> > > >
> > > > > Unfortunately today the majority chooses free beer over free
> > > > > speech.
> > > >
> > > > Well, I've done a little research, and have found I can have both
> > > > free beer and free speech. You can get a "free" gmail account
> > > > without Google+.
> > >
> > > Errrrrrrr. Wrong.
> > > You pay with being spied on for marketing purposes.
> >
> > I don't know how useful such marketing info will be on correspondence
> > from a few technically oriented mail lists. Google probably gets way
> > better info from Chrome. ;-) Although from the ads I see, I think
> > the algorithm is very badly broken. It has yet to correctly determine
> > even my gender.
>
> So you think they only look at the content of the mail?
> They can read that already without you having an account with them.
> Or do they track
> - how often and when you check your mail
> - how often you reply
> - the location from where you are checking?
>
> The algorithm is not broken. It is big data. That is the crux with
> statistics there is no factual link between cause and effects. It's just
> hedging you bets. So you don't fit their statistical modeling. Good (or
> bad) for you. Here is the scary part, they actually might know more about
> your future than you do and the ads are dead on. You yet do not even know
> about your sex change in two years ;)
I don't get any ads.
Lisi
Reply to: