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

481–490 of 1001 posts

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#481

Post by 37r7dyysy »

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…

As always, the question is who's going to do better? The Americans already gave it their best shot and this is where they ended up. Certainly not any of the members of the EU, it'd get hobbled by regulation as they've never cared about actual free speech of the kind the Americans value. It's sure not going to be coming out of anywhere in SEA or NAME with the way governments in those regions tend to operate. So who's left to do better at a scale that matters?

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#482

Post by seaman1921 »

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…

must be one of those AWU promoters

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#483

Post by iammisc »

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…

Well by all means regulate, but realistically, for example, if we had a Google Drive run by the 'other side' of the political aisle (kind of like Gab v Twitter), then if Google banned certain content, it's unlikely the other would, and vice versa.

Unfortunately, the issue here is companies responding to something other than the market.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#485

Post by brippalcharrid »

rtkwe wrote: post #428
dfdz wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A recent high profile example is the lab leak "conspiracy theory". Facebook block discussion of the possibility that Covid-19 started from a lab leak, but now scientists are seriously considering the issue. Imagine if Google had this policy last year, and a scientist posted a Google Slides presentation about the merits of the lab theory (and imagine it was banned under the misleading "health" information umbrella) ..…

I remember the original theory going round that was getting removed being that it was a lab leak of a bioweapon not the current theory that it was more normal 'gain of function' research that got out. Those are two very different accusations.

How could we tell the difference without knowing the motivations of the people responsible for it? Has their conduct been likely to inspire confidence that they were on the up-and-up? Gain-of-function research is used for offensive as well as defensive purposes; it is inherently dual-use, and it can be hard to draw a line between the two. We aren't in a position to be able to exclude the possibility that this research was being carried out with the intention of being transferred to pure weapons development once suitable candidate pathogens had been developed.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#486

Post by yazantapuz »

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…

In the other hand, government agencies are not saviors either.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#487

Post by iammisc »

psyc wrote: post #259
izacus wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I'm really sorry for the off-topic, but I've been waiting for a chance to ask because I see it here very, very often. What are people intending to denote with the "private" in "private company", especially where the company is so obviously and well-known to be public[ally traded]? What are you trying to distinguish it from by calling it private? Are you just pointing out it's not the government or quasi-governmental?…

The reason a distinction is drawn is because government has more rules it must follow when interacting with the public than google. Non-governmental entities in the united states are less regulated than the government.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#488

Post by BrainWorm »

contravariant wrote: post #441
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…

There's something fundamentally flawed about the idea that censorship in the name of preventing misinformation is protecting the foundation of democracy. You cannot have true democracy if people cannot disagree with their governments, they must be able to disagree with any truth or opinion such a government might consider self-evident, just on the off chance they're right. I should at this point note that Google does…

Soapbox, Zine, Flyer, Specialty Forum, Usenet, Civilian Radio

You aren't censored if you can't generate a link to Bits on a google server.

Re: Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

#490

Post by Spivak »

ping_pong wrote: post #123

So now, a minimum wage drone at Google, or even worse an AI, will be able to shut down my entire account because they perceived my document that I'm sharing as "misinformation"? That's pretty fucking scary.

I mean they already could immediately shut down your account for suspicious activity with no resource so really this is less mild than that.
Post reply on HN