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

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#411

Post by michaelmrose » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 8:08 PM UTC

throwaways885 wrote: post #227

duxup wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

> The other truth is we're all outraged when these companies host some stuff that we don't like Please, speak for yourself. I think these companies should host absolutely everything[0]. Between 2010-2016 was the golden age for these companies actually being free and open. Edit: Within the law. To be honest, there is very little I see that should be censored beyond CP.

If I host a document for a certified notadoctor telling you that you should treat your children's autism by feeding them bleach which will certainly constitute abusing all of them and perhaps killing some do you think online marketplaces of ideas should ignore the fact that half the population is dumber than dirt and the dead kids and keep serving up poison?

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#412

Post by colordrops » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 8:09 PM UTC

commandlinefan wrote: post #201

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…

> Google's increasing role as an arbiter of right vs wrong The problem is that (I doubt) Google is really doing this out of some misguided attempt at "protecting" people but rather as a reaction to what they perceive to be what the people want. When America was a very religious (Christian) country, media distributors stayed away from anything that appeared "blasphemous". They didn't necessarily do it because there wa…

It's not only right wingers but left wing organizations like the Atlantic Council. They assist multiple companies in determining which content is deemed permissible.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#413

Post by zarkov99 » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 8:09 PM UTC

dfdz wrote: post #310

jonnycomputer wrote: post #22

What. 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…

A recent high profile example is the lab leak "conspiracy theory". Facebook block discussion of the possibility that Covid-19 started from a lab leak, but now scientists are seriously considering the issue. Imagine if Google had this policy last year, and a scientist posted a Google Slides presentation about the merits of the lab theory (and imagine it was banned under the misleading "health" information umbrella) ..…

Something similar that is happening now is the Ivermectin discussion, which right now, to some sounds as crazy as the lab leak, to some, sounded a few months ago. So we have learned nothing from the lab leak debacle.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#414

Post by rscoots » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 8:10 PM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #388

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…

Who at Google do you trust to decide what information you and I are allowed to know? What is this person's qualifications?

How can they be held to account when they inevitably get it wrong?

Where will the highly-transparent write-ups detailing moderation decisions be published?

Seems like if Google actually gave a damn about the morality of censorship as some sort of 'neccessary evil' you'd be able to answer these questions easily^. Until then, it's a non-starter in my book.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#415

Post by the8472 » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 8:10 PM UTC

hash872 wrote: post #230

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 issue is that we know from experience, after 20+ years of the modern Internet, that if you make a 'free speech' drive/repository place that's widely available, it will host the absolute worst of the human race. Then, let's say you personally were in charge of said Free Speech Drive- every day you'd get up and hear about people using it for (legal) jailbait photos, Islamic State recruiting, collaboration between e…

> That if you make a 'free speech' drive/repository place that's widely available, it will host the absolute worst of the human race.

That's only due to selection effects. If being open were the default then they'd be diluted among all the other people. ISPs themselves, (older) reddit, 4chan all serve as examples that the people you don't want to talk to can be mostly siloed off to some corner and you can have your own corner where you can have fun. Things only get problematic once you add amplification mechanisms like twitter and facebook feeds or reddit's frontpage.

> For one thing, it's easy to say 'well we'd only take down illegal content'. But in practice there isn't such a bright line, there's lots of borderline stuff, authorities could rule something posted on your site illegal after the fact- lots of these situations are up to a prosecutor's judgement call. Would you risk jail to push the boundaries?

I don't see how that's an issue? They send a court order, you take down the content is a perfectly reasonable default procedure. For some categories of content there already exist specific laws which require takedown on notification without a court order, which exactly depends on jurisdiction of course, in most places that would be at least copyright takedowns and child porn.

> Pretty soon the FBI & CIA start contacting you about some of the actual or borderline illegal content being hosted on Free Speech Drive. Do you want to deal with that?

That's pretty much what telcos have to deal with for example. Supposedly 4chan also gets requests from the FBI every now and then. It may be a nuisance, but not some insurmountable obstacle. For big players this shouldn't be an issue and smaller ones will fly under the radar most of the time anyway.

Also, having stricter policies doesn't make those problems go away. People will still post illegal content, but now in addition to dealing with the FBI you also need to deal with moderation policies, psychiatrists for your traumatized moderators (which you're making see that content) and endusers complaining about your policy covering X but not Y or your policy being inconsistently enforced or whatever.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#416

Post by gjs278 » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 8:11 PM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #388

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…

[dead]

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#417

Post by kderbyma » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 8:11 PM UTC

irthomasthomas wrote: post #280

I just cancelled my drive subscription. I don't know how anyone could continue using it after this. I probably have dozens of docs and hundreds of research papers contradicting government health advice on diabetes and heart disease. These would fall under "Misleading content related to harmful health practices" since they promote a health theory which the government considers harmful. However I would have cancelled r…

going to follow suit

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#418

Post by ilamont » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 8:11 PM UTC

"Misleading content" is already an issue for anyone who uses Google Merchant Center, and can cause your account to be suspended. Try getting a human being to give you a straight answer on what this means in specific cases - it's nearly impossible. Small accounts can't get through to anyone, and even if larger accounts or consultants can, the Googlers on the other end can't explain what triggered their "AI" to shut down the account.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#419

Post by colordrops » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 8:11 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…

Hanlon's razor has really messed up people's discernment. There are plenty of amoral, if not malicious, decisions by these companies, and these behaviors are intentional. All you HN commenters think you see the consequences clearly, and the execs making these decisions are doe-eyed innocents led down the wrong path... Are you serious?

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#420

Post by xerxesaa » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 8:12 PM UTC

TameAntelope wrote: post #355

The problem we actually need to solve is how to divorce the concept of free speech from private companies. For some reason, it's almost ubiquitously believed that the "Internet" is actually just Twitter, Google, Facebook. How can we, the tech literate, start to explain to our friends/family and eventually the world, that the Internet is actually an interconnected network of computers that no one person or entity cont…

Even if you are tech literate, how do you easily find an alternative to Facebook and Twitter?

The entire benefit of these platforms derives from the fact that they've accumulated so many users. People use these platforms because everyone else they know is on it.

I personally haven't used either for several years but I've had to "sacrifice" my online social presence and miss out on updates from my circle as a result. I put "sacrifice" in quotes because I think the net result is positive and though I miss having some updates, I overall feel quality of life is better without a public online presence.