Are you suggesting that Google took a stand on principle and voluntarily gave up gathering more data on users of its free services out of respect for privacy?
Or is it perhaps more likely that Google gets enough info from users via others means that it simply wasn't getting enough value out of email scanning? Or maybe starting a trend against email scanning hurts competitors more than it hurts themselves?
Who said they were gathering less data? Do you understand how an email mailbox works? Those emails are still there, just like they are with any other email service.
The issue is people not understanding the difference between data collection and data use for one or more purposes. This sloppy thinking (which to my mind is so obviously wrong that I can't understand how anyone would think it) shows up repeatedly on this forum, and you're just the latest example. My apologies.
Once the data is collected, it can be used at some later date for any purpose whatsoever. It's up to the user to decide if they like the purposes it is being used for today and if they either think the data will be used for purposes they like in the future or will be able to migrate their data off the service.
It is probably all of those things at the same time, and nothing stops employees from wielding considerable power when it comes to influencing decision making on any of those issues.
Google was, only a few months ago, forced by its employees to turn down lucrative defence contracts, and has since committed to not participate in them.
I think if employees manage to accomplish that we can all manage to improve our privacy practises.
I tend to agree, fwiw. Scanning emails prevented Google from taking a stand on privacy without subjecting itself to easy potshots of hypocrisy, regardless of how many times they explained the methodology and use of keywords instead of profile building.
See this announcement[0]. While I can't say for sure, it's reasonable to conclude that email monetization was confusing business clients. (I work for Google).
