wow, who does google think they are?

Wow...

Google is already "powerful" enough, has been accused of being a monopoly, stores data, records many things you do, has been shown not to be that trustworthy (i.e., they don't "delete forever" your e-mail -- read the fine print, if someone has a problem with the data, they can hand it over, etc, etc) -- has there finger in so many pots its pretty much possible to track everything you do (i.e., google analytics... if you use your real name on one website, then visit 10 other websites - if all of them use the 'free' google analytics, it is possible to store all that information, resell the packaged information to marketing firms, etc, etc).

NOW -- if you want to set up a gmail account -- they also want your PHONE number to make the tracking that much easier, under the bullsh*t guise of "protecting" their gmail accounts.

Try and set up a gmail account -- you will be then asked to set up a CELL PHONE -- and they insult you telling you -- well, if you don't have a cell phone -- get a friend to do it for you.

Who wants to use their services now?

I just hope young "kids" aren't stupid enough to sign up with google and just voluntarily hand over their cell phone number. Next... I'm surprised if they wouldn't be asking for passport ID's, three references, and a $5,000 deposit just to use their e-mail. How freakin ridiculous.

Edit:

I decided to add this here for the benefit of new readers with respect to one of Mike's comments:

Mike,

You are correct that they can decide their own business practises. And of course there are plenty of other 'free' e-mail providers. However, I am objecting to several things on several different levels, not just the 'immediate' SMS requirement.

1. Unfortunatley there will be people dumb enough to provide this information. And this information 99.9% will be misused, because these people don't read the fine print, or the information 'accidentally' gets placed into the 'wrong' hands, etc, etc.

2. It's sets a dangerous precedent, in which other firms figure it is 'ok' with this kind of "verification". Before you know it, you see all sorts of services popping up with this requirement. (As a matter of fact, it is already happening, and firms feel that it is their 'right' to have this information, and many people voluntarily hand it over, because 'everyone else' is doing it).

People are already getting "used" to voluntarily providing all of their personal information, whether it is buying a pack of batteries at radio shack (what is your phone,address/etc), or ordering food from KFC (a number of stores, if not all, now require biometric fingerprint scans to open the cash register).

The fact is that this information is now being demanded, and some people will voluntarily hand it over, until it eventually becomes a "requirement" and a "business standard". And then there is a HUGE potential for misuse and abuse down the road, that many people don't seem to see. If it was "truly" just a simple verification to "honestly" just weed out spam -- then not a bad idea. But the thing is -- the information is almost always 'saved', tracked, and then misused. That is my objection.