41–50 of 52 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All tech companies have an equal amount of the good and evil in them. For you to characterize Google as 'good' means that their PR has done it's job well.
> All tech companies have an equal amount of the good and evil in them. [Citation Needed]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What good has google really done?
Is that a joke? Maybe you don't remember the time before Google existed, but it was much worse.
Sure they revolutionized search, but I feel they glory for other peoples hard work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What good has google really done?
Is that a joke? Maybe you don't remember the time before Google existed, but it was much worse.
And yes I've been around a long time and I remember the world before Google perfectly fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All tech companies have an equal amount of the good and evil in them. For you to characterize Google as 'good' means that their PR has done it's job well.
> All tech companies have an equal amount of the good and evil in them. [Citation Needed]
There is no such thing is the world as a constant when it comes to human emotions, much less a conglomerate. Even the most darkest have at least a little light.
By reading through your history I can see where your bias lies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> All tech companies have an equal amount of the good and evil in them. [Citation Needed]
Please do tell me why a citation is needed. Are you so childish that the world exists in black and white for you? There is no such thing is the world as a constant when it comes to human emotions, much less a conglomerate. Even the most darkest have at least a little light. By reading through your history I can see where your bias lies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many, if not most, tech companies are much more secretive than Google (Apple?). From the few times I've read Google's blogs, I thought they were quite transparent and open. Ummm.... I'm talking from the perspective of hosting the largest networking group of tech founders in Silicon Valley for the last 4 years. We've held meetups of 150+ people 4 miles away from the Googleplex every month for several years now. How ma…
>If Google doesn't use that data for it's own corporate advantage it's stupid. Maybe they don't do some of the things you're saying because its illegal and in 13 years of business where their business relies on a public reputation.. it would do more damage to their business then the minor wins of spying on some startup that they can probably out compete anyways.
Not trying to be difficult, or troll.
What laws would this be breaking? The data they are gathering is proprietary and people have opted in to that data by using their services. Why shouldn't they use it to their financial benefit?
Am I the only one feeling like some people are trying way too hard to influence others on how they perceive Google? It seems to all have happened at the same time too. I don't have any proof, but it does smell a bit like an astroturf campaign (I'm not referring to this TC article, but mostly to comments I've seen here and elsewhere).
BizSpark sponsors Hackers & Founders, and they've been great to work with, but their sponsorships just cover costs of events for Hackers & Founders.
I am a believer in "If you don't pay for the product, you are the product", however. I'm not a fan of Facebook for many of the same reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>If Google doesn't use that data for it's own corporate advantage it's stupid. Maybe they don't do some of the things you're saying because its illegal and in 13 years of business where their business relies on a public reputation.. it would do more damage to their business then the minor wins of spying on some startup that they can probably out compete anyways.
because its illegal Not trying to be difficult, or troll. What laws would this be breaking? The data they are gathering is proprietary and people have opted in to that data by using their services. Why shouldn't they use it to their financial benefit?
And in any case, there's huge PR exposure. And Google is ridiculously sensitive to bad PR.
I often get the sense the lawyers are running things, considering how often I've given up personally on ideas that involve data mining.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>If Google doesn't use that data for it's own corporate advantage it's stupid. Maybe they don't do some of the things you're saying because its illegal and in 13 years of business where their business relies on a public reputation.. it would do more damage to their business then the minor wins of spying on some startup that they can probably out compete anyways.
because its illegal Not trying to be difficult, or troll. What laws would this be breaking? The data they are gathering is proprietary and people have opted in to that data by using their services. Why shouldn't they use it to their financial benefit?