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

461–470 of 1001 posts

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#461

Post by 13years »

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…

> contributing to the better world that I think we need, has started to weigh heavier and heavier on me...

This is the problem. We have arrived where we are because some group of people think that powerful companies "should make the world better".

Historically, much of the major atrocities were carried out with these very intentions.

How to build a tyrant in one simple lesson: 1) Take any normal person who wants to make the world better 2) Give them the power to do so

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#462

Post by beebmam »

prepend wrote: post #454
beebmam wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

Are you arguing that we should pass legislation that forces all US companies to host all legal content?

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#463

Post by driverdan »

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…

> America was a very religious (Christian) country

America is still a very religious country. It's not as bad as it used to be but it's still pretty bad.

Don't forget that these companies are global. Your example is still happening with pictures of Muhammad. Many companies refuse to host or show them for fear of offending Islamic extremists.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#464

Post by option »

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…

competition definitely can make things better. But we aren’t seeing enough competition and these companies are engaging in anti-competetive behavior without much consequences.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#465

Post by akira2501 »

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…

> undo that with misinformation and you don't have anything anymore.

That presumes that we have come from a period that was somehow free of misinformation. This is obviously false, and all we're doing is trading one corrupt system of control for another.

Democracy also demands that the burden of proof is on the accuser, don't you feel this same standard should apply to those, who of their own volition, take on the task of fighting this "misinformation?" Shouldn't those deprived have recourse?

> Companies aren't allowed to advertise rat poison as medicine and neither are you.

Advertising is always a commercial activity. If I'm merely sharing my opinion that rat poison, in some dose, might possibly serve as a cure for some particular ailment, how am I advertising? Isn't there a responsibility of the other end user to not accept medical advice from anonymous information published from a free document sharing service?

I'm not sure the trade offs you suggest are gaining us anything important.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#466

Post by prepend »

duxup wrote: post #200
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…

Who wants to be a consumer company that just has an anything goes policy? I sure as hell don't want to do it.

I don’t know anyone proposing “anything goes.” I think the most common request is to remove illegal speech and stick there.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#467

Post by mioasndo »

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…

You can build an alternative, and many already exist, but the average user is far more influenced by branding and ads than privacy or freedom.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#468

Post by floatingatoll »

dukeofdoom wrote: post #168

Just a friendly reminder that if you use "google" for all of your logins...then if "Google" bans you, you will lose access to all of your logins.

It took me over a year to extricate myself from Gmail, and I still keep the account open and forwarding because it hasn't been a year since the last time I found something I have to migrate. I'll be thrilled someday if I can drop it, but I imagine the vestigal leftover will just persist for all time. Gmail was a very convenient service, but ultimately I can't trust them to use reasonable human judgement in administrative decisions, and so I can't trust Google with the keys to my life.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#469

Post by driverdan »

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…

> Google isn't spying on your private files

This is false. All of the major services that host images scan them for child porn, regardless if they're private or shared.

I don't know how they're going to apply these rules and, unless you work there and are involved in this, neither do you.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#470

Post by tyingq »

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…

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

Sort of. People use "anybody with the link can view" for lots of purposes that are far short of broad public publishing.

I use it for sharing with single digit numbers of people I already know, or sometimes just for myself for things that don't need to be private.

Post reply on HN