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

Paul Buchheit:"Don't Be Evil"

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 26 posts

Re: Paul Buchheit:"Don't Be Evil"

#11

Post by Tichy »

nostrademons wrote: post #6
Tichy wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about tracking everything about people's lives, and pushing spyware onto their computers (Google Toolbar)? Would that qualify?

I wouldn't really call Google Toolbar "spyware" or say that it's pushed onto a computer. If you don't like it, don't use it. I don't. Nobody has yet made me.

I think they do try to push it, for example didn't they strike a deal with Dell so that it comes preinstalled on every Dell Computer? Don't know what else they try to bundle it with - Yahoo does the same thing, though.

Re: Paul Buchheit:"Don't Be Evil"

#12

Post by nostrademons »

Tichy wrote: post #11
nostrademons wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't really call Google Toolbar "spyware" or say that it's pushed onto a computer. If you don't like it, don't use it. I don't. Nobody has yet made me.

I think they do try to push it, for example didn't they strike a deal with Dell so that it comes preinstalled on every Dell Computer? Don't know what else they try to bundle it with - Yahoo does the same thing, though.

I think just about everything comes preinstalled on every Dell Computer. Dell probably thinks they're doing their users a favor by loading a brand new computer up with every piece of software available. I disagree, but that's why I don't buy from Dell - I've got a nice Acer laptop that came with absolutely nothing except the OS and some hardware-specific stuff (DVD-burner software, touchpad enhancements).

Re: Paul Buchheit:"Don't Be Evil"

#13

Post by vlad »

Sam_Odio wrote: post #3
gibsonf1 wrote: post #2

Hi Paul. Since you are the person at Google who came up with the "Don't Be Evil" motto, could you please explain what that means? I am genuinely curious and have no intention of badgering you about this. Thank you.

I'm not sure if this is right or not, but in philosophy class, I was taught that Google's motto was a manifestation of negative consequentialism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consequentialism#Negative_consequentialism Basically, the ethical decision is that which avoids a negative outcome. The professor mentioned a number of interesting implications of strict negative consequentialism. The following actions would be…

I'm pretty sure it was just about not being Microsoft (and their anti-trust problems), using popup ads, or spamming, the things that were major problems in 2001.

Re: Paul Buchheit:"Don't Be Evil"

#14

Post by vlad »

Sam_Odio wrote: post #7
BrandonM wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 3 points you describe sound more to me like deontology than negative consequentialism. According to the entry you linked to, deontology judges actions based on the actions themselves, while consequentialism judges actions based on their consequences. Negative consequentialism, then, involves avoiding actions which produce consequences that are overall negative. In each case you described, the actions are typicall…

You're right - my examples (and google's motto) sound more deontological, or similar to the golden rule. Maybe someone who knows more about this can clarify.

I'm pretty sure it was just about not being Microsoft (and their anti-trust problems), using popup ads, or spamming, the things that were major problems that were ticking people off 7 or so years ago when that motto came about. I don't think it's very much beyond that.

Don't be evil was a competitive advantage.

Re: Paul Buchheit:"Don't Be Evil"

#15

Post by vlad »

paul wrote: post #8
gibsonf1 wrote: post #2

Hi Paul. Since you are the person at Google who came up with the "Don't Be Evil" motto, could you please explain what that means? I am genuinely curious and have no intention of badgering you about this. Thank you.

That's a good question. There's no simple (non-circular) answer, but I can try to give a few heuristics. First, it's important to remember that any significant action is likely to have some negative consequences. One test is to ask, "Ignoring personal loss/gain, would the world be better if I stopped doing X?" For example, if a spammer stopped spamming, I think we'd all be better off, therefore spamming is probably e…

Popup ads, spam, integrating paid results with search results, and spyware/adware were the big problems during the dot com crash, when ethics went out the window, and the main community for nerds (slashdot) really liked to call companies evil for their behavior way before digg or redit existed. Once Google made that a slogan, Google was mentioned all the time in such threads for the slogan, and not just because they are a search engine.

Google's name still comes up when any evil corporate behavior is discussed in any nerd community (not so much non-nerd groups) because of that great catch phrase, especially when Microsoft is mentioned. I've always believed, as it sounds from your post, that the phrase has no philosophical or religious meaning beyond "enough is enough". If they teach otherwise in business school, they're making things up.

Re: Paul Buchheit:"Don't Be Evil"

#16

Post by jimbokun »

vlad wrote: post #15
paul wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good question. There's no simple (non-circular) answer, but I can try to give a few heuristics. First, it's important to remember that any significant action is likely to have some negative consequences. One test is to ask, "Ignoring personal loss/gain, would the world be better if I stopped doing X?" For example, if a spammer stopped spamming, I think we'd all be better off, therefore spamming is probably e…

Popup ads, spam, integrating paid results with search results, and spyware/adware were the big problems during the dot com crash, when ethics went out the window, and the main community for nerds (slashdot) really liked to call companies evil for their behavior way before digg or redit existed. Once Google made that a slogan, Google was mentioned all the time in such threads for the slogan, and not just because they…

"Google's name still comes up when any evil corporate behavior is discussed in any nerd community (not so much non-nerd groups) because of that great catch phrase, especially when Microsoft is mentioned."

I think it was Cringely who said something like: "Microsoft's slogan is similar to Google's, but slightly different. Be evil."

Re: Paul Buchheit:"Don't Be Evil"

#17

Post by earthboundkid »

nostrademons wrote: post #12
Tichy wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they do try to push it, for example didn't they strike a deal with Dell so that it comes preinstalled on every Dell Computer? Don't know what else they try to bundle it with - Yahoo does the same thing, though.

I think just about everything comes preinstalled on every Dell Computer. Dell probably thinks they're doing their users a favor by loading a brand new computer up with every piece of software available. I disagree, but that's why I don't buy from Dell - I've got a nice Acer laptop that came with absolutely nothing except the OS and some hardware-specific stuff (DVD-burner software, touchpad enhancements).

"Dell probably thinks they're doing their users a favor by loading a brand new computer up with every piece of software available."

No, Dell thinks, "Hey, free money!" Companies pay a lot to have their software pre-installed.

Re: Paul Buchheit:"Don't Be Evil"

#18

Post by gibsonf1 »

vlad wrote: post #15
paul wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a good question. There's no simple (non-circular) answer, but I can try to give a few heuristics. First, it's important to remember that any significant action is likely to have some negative consequences. One test is to ask, "Ignoring personal loss/gain, would the world be better if I stopped doing X?" For example, if a spammer stopped spamming, I think we'd all be better off, therefore spamming is probably e…

Popup ads, spam, integrating paid results with search results, and spyware/adware were the big problems during the dot com crash, when ethics went out the window, and the main community for nerds (slashdot) really liked to call companies evil for their behavior way before digg or redit existed. Once Google made that a slogan, Google was mentioned all the time in such threads for the slogan, and not just because they…

"If they teach otherwise in business school, they're making things up."

This is an understandable belief given all the publicity the bad companies get. But what about the companies that do well and actually act in a moral way? There must be many of those as well, but not nearly as exciting to report on. Here's a rising bank that makes a very large point of their moral approach to running their business: http://www.bbt.com/bbt/about/philosophy/values.html

Maybe with the increasing leveling of the business "playing field" and the increasing openness of communication, businesses that actually act in ethical ways will gain ever larger advantages in winning and keeping customers over their less ethical competitors. A business that gains a reputation for integrity in its field that focuses on providing customer value will be hard to topple.

Re: Paul Buchheit:"Don't Be Evil"

#19

Post by Tichy »

nostrademons wrote: post #12
Tichy wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they do try to push it, for example didn't they strike a deal with Dell so that it comes preinstalled on every Dell Computer? Don't know what else they try to bundle it with - Yahoo does the same thing, though.

I think just about everything comes preinstalled on every Dell Computer. Dell probably thinks they're doing their users a favor by loading a brand new computer up with every piece of software available. I disagree, but that's why I don't buy from Dell - I've got a nice Acer laptop that came with absolutely nothing except the OS and some hardware-specific stuff (DVD-burner software, touchpad enhancements).

I've been lucky so far with Dell: my lapatop came without leechware, and other computers at least came with a CD so I could reinstall a pure OS myself.

Anyway, what I don't like about Google is that they are not very open about their data collection policies. Every product they publish seems on the one hand to be very useful, on the other hand it always seems perfect for collecting even more data.

Google Earth - everyone bookmarks their own home first, right? So Google now knows where you live (they probably knew that before anyway, but still)

Google Mail - uh, oh...

Toolbar - track EVERY webpage you vist, and who knows what Google knows about your local hard drive? After all, if you search something local, and nothing is found, search automatically continues on Google, I think? So Google at the very least knows what you think is on your local harddrive...

And so. It just annoys me that they pretend to be so innocent - I don't really blame them for collecting the data, it's their business, but they shouldn't pretend to not be evil. It just rings dishonest to me.

Re: Paul Buchheit:"Don't Be Evil"

#20

Post by ralph »

paul wrote: post #8
gibsonf1 wrote: post #2

Hi Paul. Since you are the person at Google who came up with the "Don't Be Evil" motto, could you please explain what that means? I am genuinely curious and have no intention of badgering you about this. Thank you.

That's a good question. There's no simple (non-circular) answer, but I can try to give a few heuristics. First, it's important to remember that any significant action is likely to have some negative consequences. One test is to ask, "Ignoring personal loss/gain, would the world be better if I stopped doing X?" For example, if a spammer stopped spamming, I think we'd all be better off, therefore spamming is probably e…

Perhaps you could clarify something that's puzzled me. I thought when I first heard about it, the phrase was "Do no evil". Then "Don't be evil" became more prevalent. Was there ever a switch, or was it just mis-reported initially?
Post reply on HN