Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content” • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#381

Post by the8472 » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 7:53 PM UTC

izacus wrote: post #180

semitones wrote: post #39

The road to hell is paved with "good intentions". We desperately need to find a globally adoptable alternative to google and the services that it provides. Docs, Sheets, Drive, etc. are fantastic services in that they work really well on a massive scale. However, Google's increasing role as an arbiter of right vs wrong and a steward of information puts too much power into the hands of one corporation, whose best inte…

I think your fundamental error is in the fact that you think that a private company (and market competition) can fix these issues. It seems that many people on HN are just waiting for the new Savior company, that will magically have incentives to fight for them instead of making money. It's like hoping for market competition create health regulation in the food industry. Turns out, not even Apple is that messiah, and…

There is a category of companies that doesn't try to be a content arbiter. Common carriers, utilities, other services that have an obligation to contract.

Of course the "contract" with SNPs is that you "pay" with your eyeballs falling on adverts, and the ads in turn don't want to be anything like common carriers. So turning any web service into something like a common carrier would have interesting knock-on effects.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#382

Post by psyc » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 7:54 PM UTC

HanayamaTriplet wrote: post #365

psyc wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really sorry for the off-topic, but I've been waiting for a chance to ask because I see it here very, very often. What are people intending to denote with the "private" in "private company", especially where the company is so obviously and well-known to be public[ally traded]? What are you trying to distinguish it from by calling it private? Are you just pointing out it's not the government or quasi-governmental?…

The key is in your last paragraph: the companies in question are privately owned in the sense of "private property". In the context of (American) public policy, due to factors such as the First Amendment, the distinction of a company being governmental/public vs non-governmental/private is much more likely to be relevant than it being publicly/privately traded.

My point is 0.0000006% of companies are governmental. In the context of the discussion, nobody is even thinking of those. So, “private” as a qualifier is hot air. It sounds ignorant to me.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#383

Post by native_samples » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 7:54 PM UTC

hollasch wrote: post #171

drluke wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it time we make it easy for people to host thier own clouds… Like Nextcloud. All in one at home server with Owncloud Plug-N-Play. While we are at it, have it ready to go for hosting emails and Federated Social Media. To be honest, it would be a challange, but totally doable. Decetralize the interenet once again!

ISPs have shown increasing comfort with delisting sites they deem bad. I'm a huge proponent of commoditizing data hosting, but the culture today leans heavily toward "filtering" information.

It's not really culture. It's a small minority of radical extremists who get their own way repeatedly by threatening meltdowns out of all proportion to the severity of the problem, and emotionally manipulating their own managers ("you're a bad person if you don't do this"). And they do it again and again, until the organization starts to collapse and becomes a mere tool for their political agendas.

The best way to push back on this is not some p2p techno fix. It's to systematically start firing anyone in an organization who demands the moral cleansing of customers or colleagues.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#384

Post by pfortuny » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 7:54 PM UTC

semitones wrote: post #39

The road to hell is paved with "good intentions". We desperately need to find a globally adoptable alternative to google and the services that it provides. Docs, Sheets, Drive, etc. are fantastic services in that they work really well on a massive scale. However, Google's increasing role as an arbiter of right vs wrong and a steward of information puts too much power into the hands of one corporation, whose best inte…

The “public square” is free for speaking because it belongs to everybody.

As long as a speech is said in a private place (e.gr. Google’s servers, facebook’s…) it is subject to money. It will never be free because it is not “public”.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#385

Post by slg » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 7:55 PM UTC

imwillofficial wrote: post #353

slg wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Do we still teach history at school? I'm talking about history of many countries. No fear whatsoever of information control and government censorship. I'm baffled and saddened. I agree. We don't spend enough time teaching about the history of free speech in other countries like Germany. And no, I don't only mean in 1930s and 1940s Germany. I also mean the Germany of today. They, along with much of Europe, have laws…

Playing devils advocate here, how is holocaust denial dangerous?

At the most basic level, denying or downplaying a previous genocide increases the odds of a future genocide.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#386

Post by HarryHirsch » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 7:55 PM UTC

duxup wrote: post #204

izacus wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your fundamental error is in the fact that you think that a private company (and market competition) can fix these issues. It seems that many people on HN are just waiting for the new Savior company, that will magically have incentives to fight for them instead of making money. It's like hoping for market competition create health regulation in the food industry. Turns out, not even Apple is that messiah, and…

The other truth is we're all outraged when these companies host some stuff that we don't like ... and get upset when they don't host the stuff we do like. Consumers aren't rational. Neither are their demands. I'm probably no more rational than anyone else, but I'm honest that I sure as hell don't want to give money to a service that is happy to host some violent folks content / garbage...

host some violent folks' content

Consider the Irish Troubles. Consider the US Civil Rights movement.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#387

Post by quantum_state » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 7:56 PM UTC

Misleading by what standard? “misleading content” may well be in the eyes of beholders.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#388

Post by crazygringo » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 7:56 PM UTC

I see a lot of comments misinterpreting this.

First, it's not about private files, it's about distributing content.

Google isn't spying on your private files, but does scan them when you share them publicly. E.g. keep all the pirated movies you want on your Drive, and even give private access to friends, but the moment you make them publicly viewable Google scans them and limits access accordingly. So no, this isn't applying to your private diary or privately shared documents.

And second, to those who claim absolute free speech with no limits -- notice that the two main categories here are related to democracy and health. All our legal protections ultimately depend on a democratic foundation -- undo that with misinformation and you don't have anything anymore. Similarly, your rights don't matter much if you're dead. Companies aren't allowed to advertise rat poison as medicine and neither are you.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#389

Post by YeBanKo » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 7:57 PM UTC

It sort of makes sense, if it is a document, that is public or widely shared (anyone with link can access), in which case it serve not only as a collaboration tool, but also a sort of "CDN". Though even then, limiting access seems appropriate, "removing the content, and limiting or terminating a user’s access to Google products" is too much.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#390

Post by logifail » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 7:58 PM UTC

duxup wrote: post #204

izacus wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your fundamental error is in the fact that you think that a private company (and market competition) can fix these issues. It seems that many people on HN are just waiting for the new Savior company, that will magically have incentives to fight for them instead of making money. It's like hoping for market competition create health regulation in the food industry. Turns out, not even Apple is that messiah, and…

The other truth is we're all outraged when these companies host some stuff that we don't like ... and get upset when they don't host the stuff we do like. Consumers aren't rational. Neither are their demands. I'm probably no more rational than anyone else, but I'm honest that I sure as hell don't want to give money to a service that is happy to host some violent folks content / garbage...

> we're all outraged when these companies host some stuff that we don't like

I'd argue that there is already a (fairly) tried and tested process in place to deal with this, it's the legal system.

There are plenty of media outlets that publish stuff I don't particularly like, but almost none of it is illegal, so - to be blunt - I just have to suck it up.

Some of my friends have opinions that I - at times - violently disagree with, but I file that under one of the side effects of life, and I deal with it.

I'm rarely "outraged" by companies hosting stuff. If it's illegal, knock yourself out and get it taken down.

However if it's just really, really annoying or you find it against your own worldview, perhaps take a deep breath / drink a cup of tea* / go to the gym / hug your OH, and move on to something more important?

* or gin :)