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

We are sorry

blog.path.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 220 posts

Re: We are sorry

#171

Post by oconnore »

(This will be an unpopular opinion)

The community response to this is ridiculous. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any other company that has responded to community criticism within a day or two with a policy reversal, a software change, and a deletion of offending data.

Guys and gals, stop picking on Path. They are AWESOME. They deleted your data and changed their app so it would never happen again. Try that with Facebook.

As a nerd, on some level I too lament that they didn't fix this with a cryptographic hash and a bloom filter, but come on, as businesses go, this is top notch.

Re: We are sorry

#172

Post by makmanalp »

oconnore wrote: post #171

(This will be an unpopular opinion) The community response to this is ridiculous. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any other company that has responded to community criticism within a day or two with a policy reversal, a software change, and a deletion of offending data. Guys and gals, stop picking on Path. They are AWESOME. They deleted your data and changed their app so it would never happen again. Try that…

So if I do something bad and then when someone finds out I reverse it, am I instantly forgiven and innocent? And anyone with half a brain can figure out that people would get pissed about this, which means they took the risk to do this secretly. They did not do this accidentally.

Re: We are sorry

#173

Post by mikehotel »

sambeau wrote: post #162

So now they have admitted what they have done, is someone in the UK going to prosecute them, I wonder? It seems they may have broken the data protection act in more than one way. * First, they collected personal data about UK citizens without their permission (as a 3rd party cannot give that permission), * Secondly, personal information was kept for longer than is necessary (it should have been deleted after it was u…

This may be a calculated risk. Hopefully they did more due diligence, but a quick search shows a Dec 2011 case [1] where an estate business was prosecuted for collecting info, but was fined a small amount (http://www.ico.gov.uk/news/latest_news/2011/estate-agent-pro...

Re: We are sorry

#174

Post by oconnore »

makmanalp wrote: post #172
oconnore wrote: post #171

(This will be an unpopular opinion) The community response to this is ridiculous. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any other company that has responded to community criticism within a day or two with a policy reversal, a software change, and a deletion of offending data. Guys and gals, stop picking on Path. They are AWESOME. They deleted your data and changed their app so it would never happen again. Try that…

So if I do something bad and then when someone finds out I reverse it, am I instantly forgiven and innocent? And anyone with half a brain can figure out that people would get pissed about this, which means they took the risk to do this secretly. They did not do this accidentally.

Occam's razor disagrees with you. It is perfectly plausible that some engineer with little interest in cryptography/privacy implemented the most obvious solution.

Also, yes, I typically forgive people when they reverse their actions and ask for forgiveness. It makes for good relationships.

Re: We are sorry

#175

Post by yeggeyeggeyegge »

tjoff wrote: post #119

Only problem is: It was not a mistake. They did this only to cover their asses and that has been the only concern they've ever had. That they already tried to push the opt-in was of course only in fear of what just happened. I'm sorry, I'm all for public apologies and I truly believe that it is in times like these companies have a chance to really prove themselves and really make a mishap something positive (and come…

You are right. And I am not touching Path with a ten foot pole. Not in hell. What annoys me is that Apple has caused a few hours of my life to be wasted on this shit. And has me deeply worried about what other crap is uploading all my contacts information into their hush hush secure database. And also that they allowed this piece of free advertisement seeking shit company to get through their fabled review system. Heck, I want an apology from Tim Cook, and maybe one from the heavens where a visionary soul probably rests forever now.

If the going is so bad, I will soon end up using a clam shell that I put up with all these years before an eventful day that I fell in love with an "are you getting it?" product. Makes one wonder what all those jerks making the rounds on SOPA and PIPA are doing to protect us from these Path like shit makers.

Re: We are sorry

#178

Post by 5teev »

oconnore wrote: post #174
makmanalp wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if I do something bad and then when someone finds out I reverse it, am I instantly forgiven and innocent? And anyone with half a brain can figure out that people would get pissed about this, which means they took the risk to do this secretly. They did not do this accidentally.

Occam's razor disagrees with you. It is perfectly plausible that some engineer with little interest in cryptography/privacy implemented the most obvious solution. Also, yes, I typically forgive people when they reverse their actions and ask for forgiveness. It makes for good relationships.

Forgive people, yes. Companies? Eh, plenty of other fish in the sea.

Re: We are sorry

#179

Post by yabai »

yeggeyeggeyegge wrote: post #175
tjoff wrote: post #119

Only problem is: It was not a mistake. They did this only to cover their asses and that has been the only concern they've ever had. That they already tried to push the opt-in was of course only in fear of what just happened. I'm sorry, I'm all for public apologies and I truly believe that it is in times like these companies have a chance to really prove themselves and really make a mishap something positive (and come…

You are right. And I am not touching Path with a ten foot pole. Not in hell. What annoys me is that Apple has caused a few hours of my life to be wasted on this shit. And has me deeply worried about what other crap is uploading all my contacts information into their hush hush secure database. And also that they allowed this piece of free advertisement seeking shit company to get through their fabled review system. He…

Doesn't this illustrate once again that community policing always works better than corporate policing?

Re: We are sorry

#180

Post by yeggeyeggeyegge »

csallen wrote: post #164
tjoff wrote: post #119

Only problem is: It was not a mistake. They did this only to cover their asses and that has been the only concern they've ever had. That they already tried to push the opt-in was of course only in fear of what just happened. I'm sorry, I'm all for public apologies and I truly believe that it is in times like these companies have a chance to really prove themselves and really make a mishap something positive (and come…

The fact is, there are innumerable factors that affect people's decision-making in situations like this. The ability to decide whether or not a course of action is ethical is greatly affected by what your competitors are doing, groupthink, incentives, time pressures, etc. I could keep going. And yes, your ability to "get away with it" is also a factor. Now you may say, "Who cares what the factors are? A wrong decisio…

>The ability to decide whether or not a course of action is ethical is greatly affected by what your competitors are doing, groupthink, incentives, time pressures, etc.

No, its not. You do not kill a person over any of these. You do not kill someones trust in you over any of these.

>I cannot be satisfied with the run-of-the-mill, "They did it because they're evil and untrustworthy" response.

Then how about that they are shitty crappy company who are unconcerned about ethical matters of things and more concerned about what they can get away with. You know that they must have spent considerable time and effort to enable their app and service to steal all Contact data in the first place, right?

>I think simply dismissing them as untrustworthy people is an irresponsible and short-sighted reaction. Human beings are more complex than that.

irresponsible, irresponsible? What shit are you smoking chief? I have zero responsibility for their actions, or the pubic outrage against it, or my own reaction to crap. Let them rot in hell for all I care.

>convince almost any student to cheat. That's the nature of humans.

I am alarmed, you are now equating cheating under the right circumstances, to planned and intentional thieving under business as usual.

>I highly recommend reading up on basic human psychology

and I highly recommend some common sense.

Post reply on HN