5 ms·

I'm sorry but in case anyone at Google is listening (not that they'll care what I have to say) -- that is definitively evil.

• suby 11y ago
  It's a good thing they just changed their slogan to "Do the right thing." Much more ambiguous.
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  • kllrnohj 11y ago
    No they didn't: https://investor.google.com/corporate/google-code-of-conduct.html https://investor.google.com/corporate/google-code-of-conduct... The first 3 words are still "Don't be evil" You're confused about the news that Alphabet now has a parent Code of Conduct that is "Do the right thing". But Google retains "Don't be evil".
    • suby 11y ago
      Ah, good to know. Sorry about that.
  • yohui 11y ago
    Isn't "Do the right thing" actually more affirmative? I recall that "Don't be evil" was criticized for being passive and morally neutral; Alphabet's new motto addresses that.
    • cpeterso 11y ago
      Though their definition of "Do the right thing" seems like a pretty low bar: I. Avoid Conflicts of Interest II. Ensure Financial Integrity and Responsibility III. Obey the Law https://investor.google.com/corporate/code-of-conduct.html https://investor.google.com/corporate/code-of-conduct.html
  • gcb0 11y ago
    still not the more honest "do no evil to our profits"
• kllrnohj 11y ago
  How is it evil? You do know you can not like a change without that change being evil, right? The internet permission was never accurate. Malicious apps had plenty of ways to get data off of the phone. The INTERNET permission was promising something that was not enforced. Something about it had to change, and seeing as connectivity is heavily assumed and ingrained into everything it makes sense to just nuke the false permission. Practically speaking the main users that want INTERNET to be a permission and to revoke it are people that want to block ads. That's a moral grey area at best, so making that harder is far from "evil".
  • oldmanjay 11y ago
    >Practically speaking the main users that want INTERNET to be a permission and to revoke it are people that want to block ads. That's a moral grey area at best, so making that harder is far from "evil". I'm not sure where the grey area is here. I am not under any moral compulsion to make requests on a network just because an app developer wants me to. Building structures to force me to make those requests is definitely leaning into evil. In fact, it's the last straw for me, personally. I'm back to iOS and the "evil" walled garden that respects my rights as a network user.
    • magicalist 11y ago
      > I'm back to iOS and the "evil" walled garden that respects my rights as a network user. bad news: iOS has always granted network access by default.
      • HSO 11y ago
        Not true. You can allow/disallow network access for each individual app, even system apps.