Google Drive bans distribution of “misleading content”

Post by malwarebytess » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 1:15 AM UTC

busymom0 wrote: post #643

beebmam wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please tell me why a private company should be forced to host content that they fundamentally disagree with. Why should Google be forced, legally, to carry Chinese state propaganda, for example? Why should Google be forced, legally, to carry ISIS propaganda? There are alternatives to Google. They should host that content there

> Please tell me why a private company should be forced to host content that they fundamentally disagree with. Why should Google be forced, legally, to carry Chinese state propaganda, for example? Why should Google be forced, legally, to carry ISIS propaganda? They already do host them. CloudFlare, the biggest CDN, despite their words and claims routinely censors sites meanwhile defending hosting terrorist site's fre…

Post by yackernews » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 1:22 AM UTC

Post by ryankupyn » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 1:23 AM UTC

the8472 wrote: post #415

hash872 wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that we know from experience, after 20+ years of the modern Internet, that if you make a 'free speech' drive/repository place that's widely available, it will host the absolute worst of the human race. Then, let's say you personally were in charge of said Free Speech Drive- every day you'd get up and hear about people using it for (legal) jailbait photos, Islamic State recruiting, collaboration between e…

> That if you make a 'free speech' drive/repository place that's widely available, it will host the absolute worst of the human race. That's only due to selection effects. If being open were the default then they'd be diluted among all the other people. ISPs themselves, (older) reddit, 4chan all serve as examples that the people you don't want to talk to can be mostly siloed off to some corner and you can have your o…

Post by xupybd » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 1:29 AM UTC

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…

Post by soheil » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 1:46 AM UTC

tyingq wrote: post #338

irthomasthomas wrote: post #280

I just cancelled my drive subscription. I don't know how anyone could continue using it after this. I probably have dozens of docs and hundreds of research papers contradicting government health advice on diabetes and heart disease. These would fall under "Misleading content related to harmful health practices" since they promote a health theory which the government considers harmful. However I would have cancelled r…

Yes, this is really bizarre. I get this kind of policy for some kinds of platforms, but not Drive, Docs, Sheets, Slides, and Forms. Those are my documents, and I should be free to put whatever I want in them. What if I just like to collect and share old conspiracy theory stuff that I know is wrong? For whimsy, historical, whatever purposes...