DISQUS

Rob Scott · 1 year ago

Sounds like another anti-Google tempest in a teapot to me.

Exactly what is so bad about and opt-out default on new features rather than opt-in? Given the average person's resistance to change and general ignorance of new features until they bite them on the behind, an opt-out ensures better test coverage in a beta product. Yes, keep in mind that gmail is STILL in beta.

My suggestion is that those who fear some damage to their privacy go in and shut off optional features on a regular basis...or perhaps they should complain to the mail service provider that since they are paying top dollar for privacy, they demand that the service agreement they assented to be enforced to the letter.

samochody · 1 year ago

Dam you google :-)

No Thanks · 1 year ago

Please stick to reporting the venture world news, which you do well, and opinions on same when you have them. Reporting gossip like this serves neither us nor you very well.

Gubatron · 1 year ago

As if Gmail itself wasn't enough of a distraction.

GOOG is EVIL · 1 year ago

Yet another example of Google caring more about beating a competitor than delivering something useful to real people.

One more thing they better do - global opt-out of having ANY of my data on their servers.

ITrush · 1 year ago

Speculations! Well, let's just hope for the best and not for the worst!

Nhick
http://www.itrush.com

Pran Kurup · 1 year ago

Very believable. Google needs something to go after Facebook. Gmail is a good place to start. Ideally, Yahoo should try similar things using Yahoogroups. It is already has a solid installed base of users and the social networking features of today (updates of others, ability to ad apps etc.) will be a great addition to yahoogroups.

Jarred · 1 year ago

I still do not understand how you and others see the Google Reader debate as one about privacy. Google made clear from the inception of Shared Items that doing so puts it on a *public* page and a *public* feed. What do you expect when you click "share", anyway? Yes it was at a convoluted URL, and technically you had to physically give that link to friends... but it was never *private* as in *protected* or *hidden*. It may be annoying and a breach of confidence... but it is not a breach of privacy at all.

The debate over this -- and the forthcoming Gmail features -- is about opt-in v. opt-out and giving users greater flexibility and control over who they share updates and other content with. It's about user choice, not user privacy.

TanNg · 1 year ago

Shall they send my search history to all my contacts?