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

Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

ia601707.us.archive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 402 posts

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#151

Post by seanmcdirmid »

steveBK123 wrote: post #85
RhodesianHunter wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which in some contexts makes sense. Losing all of your Facebook pictures is never going to be as devastating as losing your retirement.

I think its rather disingenuous or modest for tech to fall back on "whats the worst that can happen, maybe you lose some pictures from the cloud" as a defense for such a light touch. There's many areas in which tech competes directly with, or has attempted to build shadow parallel systems to other more regulated industries - payments, exchanges, various medical plays, media, etc.

> There's many areas in which tech competes directly with, or has attempted to build shadow parallel systems to other more regulated industries - payments, exchanges, various medical plays, media, etc.

If we are just talking about the USA, then I think both Apple and Google had to partner with entities in the financial industries to do payments, they didn't just bypass regulation in those industries. Then there is Stripe and Square (erm, whatever Square is called now), I'm not sure what regulations they fall under.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#152

Post by seanmcdirmid »

dylan604 wrote: post #106
steveBK123 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think its rather disingenuous or modest for tech to fall back on "whats the worst that can happen, maybe you lose some pictures from the cloud" as a defense for such a light touch. There's many areas in which tech competes directly with, or has attempted to build shadow parallel systems to other more regulated industries - payments, exchanges, various medical plays, media, etc.

all of those "disruptors" just makes me cringe every time i hear it now. there have been so many bad actors. paypal still seizing accounts because some automated thing made a decision that can't be shared as to why. seems like Stripe as been in the news for similar topics. then you get the ones like Uber just flagrantly doing shady things to get that disruption. now, when i hear someone say disrupt, i immediately ass…

Paypal and Stripe's actions like seizing accounts automatically is probably more due to complying to industry rules rather than avoiding them. The "shady" things are what any bank would have to do, not just the techs.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#153

Post by hgsgm »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #135
DesiLurker wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you think thats criminal, you should look up what they do with android anti fragmentation agreement.

Heh, well aware. The MADA and AFA are insane reads, especially when you realize they apply to over half the mobile phones on the planet . It's one of those things they keep confidential not because they have any real trade secrets, but because they're flagrantly illegal and they want to keep government officials from seeing them.

Yeah, imagine if Apple banned their manufacturing and sales partners from selling devices with forks of the iOS open source project too. Or if Microsoft banned Windows forks.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#154

Post by labster »

steveBK123 wrote: post #107
dylan604 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only think to myself, well, yeah, that's what that industry gets for all of the bullshit shenanigans that have been pulled in the past. Is everyone commit flat out illegal shit like Wolf Of Wall St? No. But this is the only way to allow any semblance of trust by anyone. That being said, I personally believe every company if finance/banking is doing something shady somewhere, even if only a small number of peopl…

cool story, given the left-right populist-progressive agreement on regulating big tech.. its coming for the HN crowd next :-)

As long as no one can see my comment history on HN, I’ll be fine.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#156

Post by dvzk »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #94
pclmulqdq wrote: post #30

I moved from an HFT firm to Google. The attitude difference with respect to document holds was hilarious. At the HFT firm, the attitude was, "we're constantly being sued (by the SEC and others), so we treat all of our records like they're under litigation holds, just in case the SEC claims they wanted them, even the off-topic slack channels." At Google, the attitude was, "we're constantly getting sued, so we treat al…

"The attitude difference with respect to document holds was hilarious." megcampbell@google.com: "it needs to be history off" https://ia802501.us.archive.org/21/items/gov.uscourts.dcd.22... schramm@google.com: "should we have history off for this?" https://ia802501.us.archive.org/21/items/gov.uscourts.dcd.22... margaretlam@google.com: "Hi Tim, if OK, can I ask you to turn history off :)" https://ia802501.us.archive.or…

I assume my private messages are always public record, so I don’t get this mindset. My first thought when messaging someone is, “What if they screenshot or leak this conversation?” or “What if their message history is subpoenaed?” It never makes sense to assume confidentiality with other coworkers.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#157

Post by johannes1234321 »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #112
GalenErso wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the strange people in the office What made them strange, other than the fact you didn't know who they were?

In a 100-person company full of T-shirt wearers, ~4 random men walking around the trading floor in the middle of the day (a big no-no for any sort of guest) in suits is strange.

When I was in a bank we were asked to dress up in times when BaFin (German SEC) was expected in the campus.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#158

Post by wil421 »

steveBK123 wrote: post #105
zaphirplane wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The work Android or iPhone records calls? Is it even possible

It's all just data, isn't it? Route it all through VoIP and record it there? Maybe theres some bank-compliance phone vendor that operates its own MVNO and does the recording for you? here's something like that - https://www.teleware.com/products/mobile-voice-recording/

No it’s not possible in the way or manner you described unless it’s an office phone.

Banks aren’t creating a super secret MVNO to comply with regulations and the telcos aren’t cutting breaks for a bank or a 3rd party spy network. I’d imagine saving all employees cellphone calls for 7 years is a very expensive project.

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#159

Post by scarface74 »

shadowgovt wrote: post #149
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be difficult just to target FAANGs. If the law changed to include them, it would probably include everyone else as well. They aren't in any activity that is regulated by a special agency like banks/traders are.

Hypothetically, we could base it on revenue.

You think it’s a good idea to give the government more surveillance power?

Re: Google CEO: “can we change the setting of this group to history-off” [pdf]

#160

Post by seanmcdirmid »

shadowgovt wrote: post #149
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be difficult just to target FAANGs. If the law changed to include them, it would probably include everyone else as well. They aren't in any activity that is regulated by a special agency like banks/traders are.

Hypothetically, we could base it on revenue.

So if we take the top 10 companies by revenue, we get Apple, Google, Amazon, but also Walmart, CVS Health, UnitedHealth Group, Exon Mobil, Berkshire, McKesson, AmerisourceBergen. It still feels pretty random to me.
Post reply on HN