.
  Lightstalkers
* My Profile My Galleries My Networks

Yahoo

Well this article provides a nasty revelation about yahoo. So much for privacy and freedom of speech. What a bunch of underhanded stoolies!

by Jon Anderson at 2006-04-19 21:52:41 UTC (ed. Mar 12 2008 ) Santo Domingo , Dominican Republic | Bookmark | | Report spam→

Agreed – it leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. It seems that other free email companies are following along including Google, but at least Google tried to push back. It’s a shame that the Chinese market is such a force that US companies are willing to sacrifice the privacy of their users in order to secure new advertising revenue…

by ABC | 19 Apr 2006 22:04 | San Francisco, United States | | Report spam→
bigbrotherisation of the internet. This is a worry.

by Bruce Meyer | 20 Apr 2006 06:04 | Tokyo, Japan | | Report spam→
Not really, its just a warning to not use “free” email services like yahoo and hotmail.
A little unknown fact about hotmail is that any information created/sent/stored using the hotmail service actually belongs to microsoft. So that next “big project” your talking about, technically isnt owned by you

makes you think doesnt it

by Daniel Cuthbert | 20 Apr 2006 07:04 | london, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
True Daniel, one should take that into consideration: Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail all basically operate this way. Still, given that their “product” is our communications, I wonder whether there shouldnt be some kind of strictures placed on their “ownership” of the material and what they can do with it. I am sure there are precedents for this. The telephone companies for example. While illegal tappings do occur, and telephone conversations are used to gather evidence on people, legally speaking those do the tapping and gathering are supposed to get a court order. Moreover, since the telephone companies provide an unusual type of service that is part of the public weal, they are more strictly regulated as to their control over the service. I admit I havent thought this one out carefully, but it does seem to be one of those areas in which the internet poses interesting questions about individual freedoms vs. proprietary rights.

by Jon Anderson | 20 Apr 2006 08:04 | Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic | | Report spam→
It is all a bit scary really. Regarding phone tapping: in Italy people has actually been arrested after their phone calls were recorded (sorry I cant remeber the name of the guy i am thinking of…); I generally find that people are very paranoid about talking on the phone about all sort of stuff, while in England i dont get that feeling at all…….

by Chiara Grioni | 20 Apr 2006 08:04 | London, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
Chiara dont put anything past B"liar" and his cronies, its a well known fact that illegal tapping in the UK is widespread and very much liked by the police

by Daniel Cuthbert | 20 Apr 2006 08:04 | london, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
Daniel I kind of know that but why do you reckon people are not so scared in the uk then?

by Chiara Grioni | 20 Apr 2006 08:04 | London, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
I think ignorance is bliss for most.

Lets face it, we all use mobile technologies and other Internet related ones to communicate, including those hellbent on causing terror, so why wouldnt these channels be monitored.
A good example of this is the whole argument about the UK ID card proposal, with people saying they dont want all that information on one card, but havent actually stopped to think about how much of our information is already on file within the police’s database over in Hendon (Where they store most police records)

by Daniel Cuthbert | 20 Apr 2006 08:04 | london, United Kingdom | | Report spam→

Unfortunately privacy is hard to come by these days. Your only chance of a semblance of privacy is to live in the middle of nowhere, far away from any technology.

Londoners are already used to being monitored, wherever they go, by CCTV cameras. And every time you get on the tube and use your Oyster card (a sort of e-ticket that has a chip in it), your whereabouts are being recorded. The same goes with your bankcards, mobile phones, etc.

Even at university, we have magnetic ID cards that are used to enter and exit the buildings, use printers, borrow books, and log on to computers. CCTV cameras, and security staff monitor everything that you do within the university. Just yesterday, my friends and I got some stick from the ‘campus manager’ for going through the main entrance/exit that was ‘closed’ for the holidays. As his empty threat made it all to clear “Hand me your ID cards, or I will have to contact security…”

What a wonderful world we live in.

Check out the AOL ads at the bottom right of the page – they’ve been airing in cinemas in the UK

by David Azia | 20 Apr 2006 08:04 | London, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
Admittedly, I don’t know that much about this case but, from reading this tread, I’m wondering what affect (if any) this could have on flickr (owned by yahoo). I have heard about Microsoft’s “ownership” of all hotmail content and if yahoo has a similar policy and flickr falls under that umbrella… you see where I’m going with this. I do tend to lean towards conspiracy theories but… (?)

Thoughts?

by Art Rothfuss I I I | 20 Apr 2006 09:04 | Caracas, Venezuela | | Report spam→
I agree will you all… and I simply do not understand why a company would use the resources it has provided for us against us; so that we could possibly be imprisoned??? it seems they would try to ‘protect’ their image with their users. Wouldn’t this bad publicity and turn people off of using their products (especially hosting services) if it meant they could be imprisoned?

or… are the services they provide too lucrative, giving them no reason NOT to comply with Chinese gov’t. especially for fear of losing that market? same arguement with google’s decision to ‘censor’ their searches for a piece of the Chinese market.

by Corey Sosebee | 20 Apr 2006 10:04 | virginia, United States | | Report spam→
Art it’s not much of a leap from conspiracy to actuality. I think the closer businesses and governments get the more suspect people have to be about intent. Outsourcing of tasks traditionally accountable to the government and thus the people is a real concern it starts to get pretty grey. Private secruity contactors in Iraq, Halliburton catering to soliders a job traditionally done within the Military. Someones making big bucks here. I think President Eisenhower (sorry if I spelt his name incorrectly) warned about the Military industrial complex in his farewell address. Internet traffic all passes through the USA with the passing of the Patriot act and increases in executive powers. The whole world could be affected by things like what happen in China 4 years is a long time inside just because you disagree with the government. This can happen especialy in countries that that are making the transition from Authoritarian rule to fledgling democracy and those countries where people treat their freedom with complainacy. I know I sound like a conspiracy nut just some thoughts I have on the subject but, I reckon globalisation is a pretty heavy double bladed sword. Businesses will only grow stronger. Morality is not exactly businesses starting point. You all have a great day and an awesome shoot out there. Take care
The sometimes leftie, sometimes conspiracy nut.

by Bruce Meyer | 20 Apr 2006 10:04 | Tokyo, Japan | | Report spam→
The military-industrial complex! Been a while since I heard that term used. Brings back memories. However, the term is in fact still valid, and one neednt believe in conspiracy theories to see how these interests tend to collude in creating, whether overtly or in a semi-unconscious fashion, a state in which observation, vigilance, and surreptitious controls become the order of the day. And they convince people that this is the price of safety. Well if you live in a developed nation with a host of material comforts, you get soft, you are already so hemmed in and cosseted that you cant see outside the bubble, and protection rather than risk becomes your main preoccupation.


The powers that be may not put any of this to use, the watching may be quite passive, but once the switch is turned on, you would be surprised how many tentacles they have thrown around you. It is a bit like that movie with Gene Hackman and Will Smith, where the latter gets involved in a web of surveillance and control that is nightmarish (Enemy of the State it was called). Ok I dont want to get hyperbolic here, but frankly I am very glad to be living in a country whose ineptitude practically guarantees that I can live under the radar and no one knows my business (up to a point, that is changing). Course, this is the same country that Trujillo ruled for thirty years and he really knew how to monitor and control people. We all still carry “cedulas” (ID cards) with us that register the following information: D.o.B., Place of Birth, civil state (married or single), Blood Type, Skin Color, Address, Employment, and Notable Physical Characteristics (scars and the like).


The surveillance and the cataloguing of information about a person may be inevitable, but in the case of Yahoo, frankly, I think there is a significant issue here revolving around the use to which such information is put. I dont think such companies should be cooperating with govts in their political witch hunts, and there ought to be watchdog groups that get on their case about it.


Globalization is a scary thing in some ways because businesses get stronger, bigger, and operate outside the limits of governments, which by their nature are locked inside their geographical borders. The increasing privatization of many govt functions starts to take on a menacing aspect when viewed from this perspective.

by Jon Anderson | 20 Apr 2006 11:04 | Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic | | Report spam→
All you have to ask is one question:
How big is the Chinese market worth to Yahoo and friends



by Daniel Cuthbert | 20 Apr 2006 11:04 | london, United Kingdom | | Report spam→
Revert to snail-mail! Now!! :-)

Let’s be real, a system like the Internet, an offspring of DARPA can’t be expected to be truly “private”. Kind of naive to think otherwise. That’s why I cannot fathom what goes thru the minds of traffickers of child pornography. I mean, not the sick, belly churning aspect of the whole concept of it, but the stupidity of having and distributing said materials thru the net. They are sitting ducks, no matter how smart their cloaking, and should be hunted down as such.

No fellows, privacy and Internet are mutually exclusive. Not to mention the footprint you leave with things like participating in forums like this. I’ve been an avid user of the Net since before it was popularly known as the “Internet” (BBS’ing with a 300baud modem; a four letter username in AOL for example, and “lear@aol.com” at that -one of the first 100,000 users of AOL-, when AOL was still a closed system, as was Compuserve and Prodigy and Delphi and The Well…), 18 years later and quite a few domain names to my name, I can run but I cannot hide anymore. Big Brother is no longer watching me, he sleeps right in between my wife and I… :-)

L

by Luis E. Andrade | 20 Apr 2006 12:04 | Philly Metro Area, Jersey Side, United States | | Report spam→
Whereas I agree with Luis’s comments about the Internet and privacy being mutually exclusive, I still question the actions of companies that offer a service in order to secure a larger volume of customers which will then help boost their advertising revenues (hey, Mr, Ad Buyer, we have 20 million users using our email system. They HAVE to come to Yahoo to use their email so they HAVE to see the ads we place in front of them. And we are penetrating the market in China which has several million potential new users out of their nearly 2 billion population. Make checks payable to Yahoo Inc.), and then they stiff the email users that they have otherwise exploited to bolster ad revenues, by making email communications, even those in draft form, available to those who ask for it. Another question is, although we have focused on the Chinese government, what is happening in other countries? How does the Patriot Act work with Yahoo and Hotmail?

If we were to PAY for a Yahoo email account, would that change their obligations in any way?

by ABC | 20 Apr 2006 12:04 | Lansing, Michigan, United States | | Report spam→
Shame on us, really… How many of us actually read the “Terms of Service” of Yahoo, Hotmail, GMail, etc., “before” hitting the “I accept” button? Mind you, you must have a law degree to make it sound like they are written in English at all but the point is that is all there, in B&W, and all the grays in between. However, the most important detail of the TOS is this:
We may modify or terminate our services from time to time, for any reason, and without notice, including the right to terminate with or without notice, without liability to you, any other user or any third party. We reserve the right to modify these Terms of Service from time to time without notice. Please review these Terms of Service from time to time so that you will be apprised of any changes.

And boy, they do, they massage those terms to their liking and convenience like “silly putty”. The most adaptive viruses in the world are the TOS of Internet services and the lawyers that come up with them.

In the end, from the user’s standpoint, the maxim “you get what you pay for” fits like a glove regarding these services. And no, paid accounts or free accounts, are all the same and one from the point of view of lawyers. Liability works only one way: their way
L

by Luis E. Andrade | 20 Apr 2006 13:04 (ed. Apr 20 2006) | Philly Metro Area, Jersey Side, United States | | Report spam→
if you have to go with one, go with google. they will not provide gmail to china b/c they do not want to be put in position later that yahoo and
msn and hotmail seem to embrace – that of giving over emails, personal info, etc. yes, they did make a google.cn that has major filters on it and
many of their searched sites deleted, but at least they thought about it and said no to something in the bad scary red big brother….not that we
don’t have our own red white and blue big brother though.

by Jason Sangster | 21 Apr 2006 04:04 | Lhasa, China | | Report spam→

Get notified when someone replies to this thread:
Feed-icon-10x10 via RSS
Recommended
Icon_email via email
You can unsubscribe later.

More about sponsorship→

Participants

Jon Anderson, Photographer & Writer Jon Anderson
Photographer & Writer
Ocala Florida , United States
ABC, ABC
Washington Dc , United States
Bruce Meyer, Photog/teacher Bruce Meyer
Photog/teacher
Tokyo , Japan
Daniel Cuthbert, button clicker Daniel Cuthbert
button clicker
(..)
London , United Kingdom ( LHR )
Chiara Grioni, Photographer Chiara Grioni
Photographer
London , United Kingdom
David Azia, Pic. editor/Photographer David Azia
Pic. editor/Photographer
London , United Kingdom
Art Rothfuss I I I, Photographer/Dad Art Rothfuss I I I
Photographer/Dad
(a3photo.com)
Rochester, Ny , United States ( ROC )
Corey Sosebee, architect, photographer Corey Sosebee
architect, photographer
Guiyang , China ( KWE )
Luis E. Andrade, I shoot and I write Luis E. Andrade
I shoot and I write
Philly Metro Area, Jersey Side , United States
Jason Sangster, Jason Sangster
[undisclosed location].


Keywords

Top↑ | RSS/XML | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | support@lightstalkers.org / ©2004-2014 November Eleven