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 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201404231356.28915.lisi.re...@gmail.com
