I can't believe we give a company such power in exchange for so little.
Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”
21–30 of 1001 posts
Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”
#22What. The. Hell.
I suppose limiting sharing might be justified. But limiting access and/or deleting own files is outrageous.
For that matter, collections of misleading content can have legitimate purposes. Such as research.
Now I'm seriously considering dropping my Drive subscription.
Update: I got a lot of upvotes, but tbh I may have misunderstood the new policy, which does seem to (maybe?) only be limited to distribution of misleading content. I do think Google has a legitimate interest in regulating use of it's services as means of distributing information. I'm not sure where the line is, though. For example, if I sent an email to a friend in which I said something that isn't true, I think I would rightly be upset if Google refused to deliver the email. OTOH, if I was sending this to large numbers of people regularly, as part of some kind of misinformation operation, then maybe blocking me would be a legitimate. Complicated.
Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”
#23The doc in question (https://archive.org/details/frontline-workers-testimonies-va...) contains anecdotes mixed with blatant lies about vaccine side effects.
I totally agree that moderation can be overreaching, but this is not one of those cases.
(Edit: context from the submitter here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27858045)
Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”
#24Ahh Hell No!
I mean - Who gets to define 'misleading and/or confusing'? Google? A court case?
If they (Google) want to impose restrictions such as "Do not distribute content that deceives, misleads, or confuses users" - Might I suggest that they apply those very same standards to their own behavior.
* But who can watch the watchmen? *
I am grateful that I have a symmetric ftth connection. Information (correct or incorrect) needs to be free - as in Free to be expressed; Free to be ridiculed; Free to be disseminated; Free to be discussed; Free to be exposed to the light of day.
It is for the people themselves to decide what they do or do not believe.
Do I want Google to decide what is or is not misleading or confusing? Eh??? Say Whhaaatttt!!! Ever read a contracts terms and conditions? They can be as confusing AF… so uhhmm Yep – Let’s Ban ‘em! Woot!
Google, Eat Your Own Dogfood.
Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”
#25Their definition of misleading says it "includes information [...] that contradicts official government records". Because no government record has ever been wrong before, right?
Pressure by Chinese government, maybe?
Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”
#26If there's one thing the history of authoritarianism has taught us, it's that the invasion of privacy will not be contained. Invasion of Privacy breaks free, it expands to new territories, and crashes through barriers painfully, maybe even dangerously, but, uh, well, there it is. ...
Authoritarianism will find away.
- Ian Malcolm after they raided his house for publishing the memoires of his stay at Jurassic Park to Google Docs
Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”
#27Misleading title. Google Drive bans *sharing* "Misleading Content," which means they can disable sharing if a doc containing blatant misinformation starts to be widely shared on other platforms. (Edit: This doesn't mean they'll go into your drive and remove doubleplusungood content) Google Drive is now widely used as a social media platform -- I even get spam from google drive share notifications now! And so I'm sure…
I updated the title, thanks.
Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”
#28The doc in question ( https://archive.org/details/frontline-workers-testimonies-va... ) contains anecdotes mixed with blatant lies about vaccine side effects. I totally agree that moderation can be overreaching, but this is not one of those cases. (Edit: context from the submitter here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27858045 )
Drive is a storage service.. I don't expect Google to moderate any of my content, as long as it is legal.
Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”
#29What. The. Hell. I suppose limiting sharing might be justified. But limiting access and/or deleting own files is outrageous. For that matter, collections of misleading content can have legitimate purposes. Such as research. Now I'm seriously considering dropping my Drive subscription. Update: I got a lot of upvotes, but tbh I may have misunderstood the new policy, which does seem to (maybe?) only be limited to distri…
why consider it when you can do it? Behavior can only change when there's a massive drop in MAU and revenue, then the product team will consider backtracking
Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”
#30Their definition of misleading says it "includes information [...] that contradicts official government records". Because no government record has ever been wrong before, right?
Pressure by Chinese government, maybe?
A lot of major tech/game companies have been kowtowing to Chinese policies.