Too many emails? No problem. Google's Smart Reply will answer for you.

Google's latest revelation is Smart Reply, a system that crafts email responses. But what does this say about privacy invasion? 

Marcio Jose Sanchez/AP
This Oct. 20, 2015 photo shows signage outside Google headquarters in Mountain View, Calif.

On Tuesday, Google unveiled its latest foray into machine learning, which may just come as a welcome respite to those with cluttered inboxes.

Dubbed Smart Reply, Google’s Inbox app feature offers users three replies based on email content, ultimately customizing its generated text as it learns the user’s voice and style. Users can select and send the generated response immediately, or edit the text if the reply requires something a bit more emotional, a concept Smart Reply doesn’t yet understand.

Optimized for mobile, the system was developed using neural networks that effectively “capture the gist of what is being said without getting hung up on diction.”  

Google Research Blog

While the feature offers a real solution to a problem most working adults face, it also begs a revisit to the privacy question. As life becomes increasingly digital, the line between privacy and convenience continues to blur.

Google already scans your emails and search history to target ads, so really what’s the difference? Google maintains that in developing Smart Reply they “adhered to the same rigorous user privacy standards we’ve always held – in other words, no humans reading your email.”

But of course, just because humans aren’t reading it doesn’t mean they can’t, as it’s no secret Google has access to all your data.

Google is explicit in its terms and conditions that by using Google services, “you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works, communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content.” Though we may not have read it, we all checked the “I agree” box.

So why is this seeming invasion of privacy no longer as concerning as it once was?

In his book “The Googlization of Everything,” author Siva Vaidhyanathan attributes the shift in thought to perceived trust.

“[W]e now allow Google to determine what is important, relevant, and true on the Web and in the world. We trust and believe that Google acts in our best interest.” At the same time, Vaidhyanathan suggests we have also “surrendered control over the values, methods, and processes that make sense of our information ecosystem.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.