Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

support.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 1001 posts

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#451

Post by heavyset_go »

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.

> Between 2010-2016 was the golden age for these companies actually being free and open.

It was in the early part of the 2010's that Google, Twitter and others started censoring Islamic content in the name of antiterrorism and stopping the spread of extremism on their platforms.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#452

Post by prepend »

galaxyLogic wrote: post #208
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 could be sued if they helped distribute dangerous misleading health-information. It's really not about their "good intentions" but about their self-interest. It's not about freedom of speech either. Everybody has the right to say whatever they want, and Google has the right not to distribute it. Free markets 101. The fact that Google has de facto monopoly in some areas is a problem that government needs to dea…

They can only be sued now because they are trying to filter out content. Therefore anything remaining is intentional.

I think it would be better to not take proactive filtering based on what they think is misleading and to instead rely on legal judgements to remove info.

Misleading people isn’t illegal (in the US at least, currently). There are situations where it is and that would be a good line for Google to take.

Now I want them to be sued enough times to make them stop doing this.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#453

Post by robotresearcher »

HarryHirsch wrote: post #386
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...

host some violent folks' content Consider the Irish Troubles. Consider the US Civil Rights movement.

Isn't US Civil Rights movement notable for its nonviolence overall? MLK emphasized asserting basic human rights, so that the violence of the state should be seen more clearly by contrast.

The US revolutionary movement might be a more clear example where violent action was decisive.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#454

Post by prepend »

beebmam wrote: post #329
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…

Please tell me why a private company should be forced to host content that they fundamentally disagree with. Why should Google be forced, legally, to carry Chinese state propaganda, for example? Why should Google be forced, legally, to carry ISIS propaganda? There are alternatives to Google. They should host that content there

> Please tell me why a private company should be forced to host content that they fundamentally disagree with.

Prior to the civil rights act, companies didn’t serve certain people based on their race because they disagreed with that race.

It’s not that Google should be forced to carry stuff, they should be forced to not discriminate because they don’t like it. ISIS propaganda is illegal and should be taken down for that reason.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#455

Post by hackererror404 »

contravariant wrote: post #441
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…

There's something fundamentally flawed about the idea that censorship in the name of preventing misinformation is protecting the foundation of democracy. You cannot have true democracy if people cannot disagree with their governments, they must be able to disagree with any truth or opinion such a government might consider self-evident, just on the off chance they're right. I should at this point note that Google does…

Imagine if Britain had this same technology when the USA was founded... It of course would have quickly cracked down on communications and it would have done so in the name of "peace" and "what's right"...

This idea that thinking critically of a government and even believing that perhaps the government as it stands today is not the government "of and for the people" (sure could be interpreted as anti-democracy by that same corrupt government)... And maybe that's not correct, but who is the government to say that we can or cannot challenge them in public discourse as it is supposedly protected under the first amendment?

This is indeed an insanely slippery slope and people willing to trade their freedoms because they think it's for the ultimate good, I think are really making a mistake... it's not difficult to understand that this is one of the first steps of an actual fundamentally corrupt government... This is easily open to abuse and vast interpretation.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#456

Post by floren »

Pick-A-Hill2019 wrote: post #24

Ahh 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 inco…

> 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.

You have a symmetric FTTH connection for now. Host something somebody considers too offensive and they'll get your connection pulled. We don't hear about this because essentially nobody hosts their own stuff at home, but all it would take is identifying the ASN of your IP address and making a sufficiently loud noise on Twitter.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#457

Post by jonnycomputer »

Alex3917 wrote: post #358
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…

> I suppose limiting sharing might be justified. But limiting access and/or deleting own files is outrageous. It's definitely not just a hypothetical risk either. In the last month, Facebook blocked me from distributing my blog post on Django best practices because they claim it violates their community standards. It's literally a post about how to structure API code, but now they're claiming that it's advocating for…

That's crazy.

Twice in the last week a comment of mine got blocked on Facebook for violating policies. In the first case, I posted a link to an EPA website and a screenshot of a graph posted on it, showing a reduction in smog in the last 10 years compared to 1987. In the second, I pasted a screenshot of something from the CDC's COVID Tracking site and a link to a British research paper on the efficacy of the vaccines wrt the delta variant. In the second case, my link was broken somehow, which might have contributed to the problem somehow?

They never went back up.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#458

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

jinpa_zangpo wrote: post #378

The problem isn't that one company has made its own decision on what to ban. The problem is that the White House is literally compiling a list and telling all the social media companies who to ban. This is censorship by proxy.

That was the most shocking thing that came out recently imo. And not to be reported at all anywhere.

That Trump’s initially ridiculous lawsuit against big tech that they are operating as government agents - the White House just basically agreed with.

Ignore the Twitter, but the CSPAN video is good. https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1416095333877260292

“We don’t censor, we just tell a social media monopoly what to censor, it’s totally not violating the first amendment!” … wth

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#459

Post by floren »

MattGaiser wrote: post #214

People call for tech regulation. Government has mandate to regulate tech. Tech realizes that shift in power and self regulates in a way favourable to the government. This reminds me of when Reddit tossed out Ellen Pao. Reddit demanded wholesale change, so what they got /u/spez, who happily banned all manner of subreddits when the fight was originally about one. https://old.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/3dautm/c…

"Mighty nice service ya got here, shame if it was ta get... regulated. Unrelated, boy we sure hate when people say XYZ"

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#460

Post by jonnycomputer »

tpolzer wrote: post #32
jonnycomputer wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drive is a storage service.. I don't expect Google to moderate any of my content, as long as it is legal.

This is about _distribution_.

I can't edit my comment anymore, but I think you are correct.
Post reply on HN