[ale] What's so special about gmail invites?

[Jeff Hubbs]

On Thu, 2004-09-02 at 20:51, Robert Reese wrote:
> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
> On 9/1/2004 at 7:56 PM Jeff Hubbs wrote:
> 
> >On Wed, 2004-09-01 at 19:50, Robert Reese wrote:
> >
> >> None of them scan them for the purpose of analyzing content for the
> >purpose
> >> of individualized statistics.  Neither of them accrue usage data on a
> >> per-user basis.
> >
> >And you know this...how?
> 
> I've analyzed the output of these programs.  However, if you have information to the contrary, I'm interested in it.

>From "analyz[ing] the output of these programs," you know that Google
cannot and does not peruse the mail that goes through Gmail?  If you can
analyse the output, why can't Google analyze the output - or the input,
for that matter?

I thought that only quantum encryption had the capability of proving if
information had been observed or not.  

Jason Day's complaint about Gmail stems from the idea that they who run
an e-mail system can do what they want with the e-mail - read it, keep
it, retransmit it, print it on microfilm and send it to Jupiter, etch it
into the marble on the floors of their office buildings.