5 ms·

In contrast with tag line : "Don't be evil"

by linux_devil 13y ago

troels 13y ago
It doesn't seem like this was intentional in any way. I don't think that counts as being "evil".
- saalweachter 13y ago
  "Don't be careless?"
  - thrown7779 13y ago
    "Don't underestimate the ability of some segment of the population to be offended by something you do. Whatever you do, you'll offend someone." Being offended is an epidemic...
    - marquis 13y ago
      Being offended is a moral issue and I agree, as a business you can't fight that 100%. However, being forced to conform to a business's view of your identity is unethical, especially as Google changed the rules - if they had indicated this might happen then those affected could have chosen not to use Plus.
      - deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    - xenophanes 13y ago
      They seriously hurt a lot of people in a very predictable and avoidable way, and are not interested in fixing the harm they've done. And you're whitewashing it without giving any substantive answer to the points in the linked article.
      - thrown7779 13y ago
        If you don't want to be "outed" by google, why give google the information needed to do that? Is creating 2 separate google accounts impossible these days?
        gnaffle 13y ago
        AFAIK it's required by the new terms that you give your real name. And to do much of anything you need to verify your account with an SMS to a previously unused cell phone number.
        blueskin_ 13y ago
        No, but google will do all it can to link them.
        Casseres 13y ago
        I thought I had two separate accounts for YouTube and Gmail. Not anymore. I used my Gmail address to register an account with YouTube. What prevents them in the future from buying some company, and link those accounts because I use the same credit card or some other supposedly unique identifier?
        dredmorbius 13y ago
        I had two separate accounts. Google merged them despite my telling them not to. Seems to me HN covered this: https://plus.google.com/104092656004159577193/posts/VZSLjkdqksG https://plus.google.com/104092656004159577193/posts/VZSLjkdq... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6745525 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6745525 http://i.imgur.com/YgEjUuI.jpg http://i.imgur.com/YgEjUuI.jpg Google's proven it cannot be trusted to respect user choice, nor to not arbitrarily change the rules at a later date.
    - blueskin_ 13y ago
      So's privacy intrusion.
    - JulianMorrison 13y ago
      It isn't "offended" to be outed amidst transphobic people, it's "endangered". I wish we lived in a society so safe it would only be "offended".
- blueskin_ 13y ago
  Google ditched that motto a long, long time ago. Now it's "Don't be evil to our profits".
- 6d0debc071 13y ago
  It requires positing an extraordinary degree of ignorance on the part of Google to support the contrary view. After all, people have always had the option to use their real names, they've simply chosen not to - presumably before making the change you'd make some attempt to look into why people would choose that way.
- JulianMorrison 13y ago
  "Negligent with other people's lives due to unexamined privilege" is a subset of evil.
- gnaffle 13y ago
  It doesn't have to be intentional to be evil. But, 1) The decision to require a full name and gender was intentional 2) The decision to merge multiple accounts under the Google+ umbrella was intentional 3) The decision to automate this merging was also intentional. I've myself been caught off guard with Google storing my search history on one of my customers' Google account because I forgot to log out after managing their AdWords account. Stupid me, right? But just as with Facebook, they've lost my trust. I'm not alone, and I think it will come back to bite them in the end.
rmc 13y ago
Google 2003: "Don't be evil" Google 2010: "Evilness is hard to define" Google 2014: "We make military robots"
- cbr 13y ago
  "Google executives said the company would honor existing military contracts, but that it did not plan to move toward becoming a military contractor on its own." http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/14/technology/google-adds-to-its-menagerie-of-robots.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/14/technology/google-adds-to-... (Disclaimer: I work for Google.)
  - blueskin_ 13y ago
    Remember when google kept personal details private too? How long did that last, exactly?
    - cbr 13y ago
      Are you saying you think Boston Dynamics will go for more defense contracts, despite Google's claims that they won't?
thelukester 13y ago
In contrast to “Attack the evil that is within yourself, rather than attacking the evil that is in others.” ― Confucius It boils down to taking responsibility for your own actions. She took the effort to change her physical gender without much effort into changing her online identity. She didn't change her G+ profile and ignored google's warnings about using it.

In contrast with tag line : "Don't be evil"

troels 13y ago

It doesn't seem like this was intentional in any way. I don't think that counts as being "evil".

saalweachter 13y ago
"Don't be careless?"
- thrown7779 13y ago
  "Don't underestimate the ability of some segment of the population to be offended by something you do. Whatever you do, you'll offend someone." Being offended is an epidemic...
  - marquis 13y ago
    Being offended is a moral issue and I agree, as a business you can't fight that 100%. However, being forced to conform to a business's view of your identity is unethical, especially as Google changed the rules - if they had indicated this might happen then those affected could have chosen not to use Plus.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - xenophanes 13y ago
    They seriously hurt a lot of people in a very predictable and avoidable way, and are not interested in fixing the harm they've done. And you're whitewashing it without giving any substantive answer to the points in the linked article.
    - thrown7779 13y ago
      If you don't want to be "outed" by google, why give google the information needed to do that? Is creating 2 separate google accounts impossible these days?
      - gnaffle 13y ago
        AFAIK it's required by the new terms that you give your real name. And to do much of anything you need to verify your account with an SMS to a previously unused cell phone number.
      - blueskin_ 13y ago
        No, but google will do all it can to link them.
      - Casseres 13y ago
        I thought I had two separate accounts for YouTube and Gmail. Not anymore. I used my Gmail address to register an account with YouTube. What prevents them in the future from buying some company, and link those accounts because I use the same credit card or some other supposedly unique identifier?
      - dredmorbius 13y ago
        I had two separate accounts. Google merged them despite my telling them not to. Seems to me HN covered this: https://plus.google.com/104092656004159577193/posts/VZSLjkdqksG https://plus.google.com/104092656004159577193/posts/VZSLjkdq... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6745525 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6745525 http://i.imgur.com/YgEjUuI.jpg http://i.imgur.com/YgEjUuI.jpg Google's proven it cannot be trusted to respect user choice, nor to not arbitrarily change the rules at a later date.
  - blueskin_ 13y ago
    So's privacy intrusion.
  - JulianMorrison 13y ago
    It isn't "offended" to be outed amidst transphobic people, it's "endangered". I wish we lived in a society so safe it would only be "offended".
blueskin_ 13y ago
Google ditched that motto a long, long time ago. Now it's "Don't be evil to our profits".
6d0debc071 13y ago
It requires positing an extraordinary degree of ignorance on the part of Google to support the contrary view. After all, people have always had the option to use their real names, they've simply chosen not to - presumably before making the change you'd make some attempt to look into why people would choose that way.
JulianMorrison 13y ago
"Negligent with other people's lives due to unexamined privilege" is a subset of evil.
gnaffle 13y ago
It doesn't have to be intentional to be evil. But, 1) The decision to require a full name and gender was intentional 2) The decision to merge multiple accounts under the Google+ umbrella was intentional 3) The decision to automate this merging was also intentional. I've myself been caught off guard with Google storing my search history on one of my customers' Google account because I forgot to log out after managing their AdWords account. Stupid me, right? But just as with Facebook, they've lost my trust. I'm not alone, and I think it will come back to bite them in the end.

rmc 13y ago

Google 2003: "Don't be evil" Google 2010: "Evilness is hard to define" Google 2014: "We make military robots"

cbr 13y ago
"Google executives said the company would honor existing military contracts, but that it did not plan to move toward becoming a military contractor on its own." http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/14/technology/google-adds-to-its-menagerie-of-robots.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/14/technology/google-adds-to-... (Disclaimer: I work for Google.)
- blueskin_ 13y ago
  Remember when google kept personal details private too? How long did that last, exactly?
  - cbr 13y ago
    Are you saying you think Boston Dynamics will go for more defense contracts, despite Google's claims that they won't?

thelukester 13y ago

In contrast to “Attack the evil that is within yourself, rather than attacking the evil that is in others.” ― Confucius It boils down to taking responsibility for your own actions. She took the effort to change her physical gender without much effort into changing her online identity. She didn't change her G+ profile and ignored google's warnings about using it.