4 ms·

This has been the first time that I have really felt that Google betrayed my trust. Trust is something that is neigh impossible to get back once it is lost. It

This has been the first time that I have really felt that Google betrayed my trust. Trust is something that is neigh impossible to get back once it is lost. It's interesting because I've rationally understood how scary it is that they have all of this data about me. Now I can finally see that there are places where it may come out, or they get hacked and someone steals it etc. Just a wake up call really, which is something that Google should be scared about, because they have a scary amount of data bout all of us.

Tichy 17y ago
I don't think it is betrayal if it is not intentional.
- groaner 17y ago
  Intentional or not, all that matters is the public perception of what Google has done here. If they make me feel betrayed, then it's as good as betrayal. That unpology that they posted certainly isn't helping, either.
nfnaaron 17y ago
The Google Buzz episode is an example of the risk of putting any data anywhere, regardless of how non-evil and trustworthy the data collector may be. I'm not saying you should pull all your data and buy a tarp and a shovel. But consider a few things. Google didn't set out to be evil or clumsy in this case. They created the product with the best of intentions: to improve your connections with your network, and as a result make that network (that they host) more valuable to them. I'm sure "win-win" was probably said in more than one conference room. But they made a number of mistakes, in implementation and in rollout. Most of the mistakes were minor, but amplified by "the millions that have signed up with Buzz!" A few mistakes were serious and possibly dangerous to a smaller number of people. Personal and child security were mentioned by more than one commenter. One of the lessons learned from this, and any other misuse of data, is that your data will almost certainly be misused, on purpose or by accident. The more data, especially in one place, the more certain. I think the freelancers who suddenly had their clients exposed to each other were somewhere between surprised and horrified. My own actions include not using my gmail account anymore, since a couple years. I use some of their products, but I don't sign in unless I need to be signed in to do something. That doesn't mean that Google doesn't still know a lot about me. Even if I never had a gmail account they would still know a large part of my network, because a large number of my correspondents use gmail. Depending on my correspondents, I might become interesting to the Chinese government in another breakin, or I might get unwanted attention from law enforcement because I correspond with on of their suspects, creating even more potential for mistakes and misuse. The larger my actual or accidental Google network, the more likely something like that might happen. There's nothing wrong with using Google. There's nothing wrong with using free services. But you should certainly think about how things can go wrong, and proceed from there. If you need your data to be online, it might make sense to keep some of your data with a paid for service (they aren't expensive) whose only interest in your data is the fee for keeping it secure and available; at least there's less temptation to play with it in creative ways and risky ways.
heed 17y ago
I'm not sure I get it. Is Google supposed to get everything right on their first try? It seems many people would say yes, even many users of HackerNews. This is very counter to my understanding of the philosophies shared around here. I always thought it was best to push an new idea out there as fast as you can and iterate as you go. Granted Google's mistake is a BIG mistake, but condemning them for one act is somewhat irrational, no?
- freshfunk 17y ago
  Well Google's play book used to be push stuff out as beta or a labs feature. Let only the very sophisticated users opt-in and try things out before pushing it out to the general public. This was obviously rolled out in a very different fashion. Plus they attached it to Gmail which is a tried-and-true product. Buzz feels very beta to me. If Buzz we rolled out under labs or a separate interface I'm sure that there wouldn't be as much backlash as there has been.
  - frio 17y ago
    Perhaps, but I think for this particular market they had no choice but to launch big. Look at Orkut, their previous (dead) attempt at a social network. Facebook is extremely entrenched now, and there's little to no incentive to users to opt-in to something else. To attack the power of Facebook/Twitter, this was really the only way of doing it (although I agree, perhaps a Labs feature would have been a better way of introducing the concept for a couple of months at first).
    - mreid 17y ago
      I agree with you that Google has their work cut out for them trying to get into this market, but that doesn't excuse their mistake. If you think it does then I am very curious to hear how you felt when Microsoft leveraged their desktop strength to compete with Netscape in the browser wars.
    - smokey_the_bear 17y ago
      Orkut is hardly dead, just because a product isn't popular in your market doesn't mean it's dead.

Tichy 17y ago

I don't think it is betrayal if it is not intentional.

groaner 17y ago
Intentional or not, all that matters is the public perception of what Google has done here. If they make me feel betrayed, then it's as good as betrayal. That unpology that they posted certainly isn't helping, either.

nfnaaron 17y ago

The Google Buzz episode is an example of the risk of putting any data anywhere, regardless of how non-evil and trustworthy the data collector may be. I'm not saying you should pull all your data and buy a tarp and a shovel. But consider a few things. Google didn't set out to be evil or clumsy in this case. They created the product with the best of intentions: to improve your connections with your network, and as a result make that network (that they host) more valuable to them. I'm sure "win-win" was probably said in more than one conference room. But they made a number of mistakes, in implementation and in rollout. Most of the mistakes were minor, but amplified by "the millions that have signed up with Buzz!" A few mistakes were serious and possibly dangerous to a smaller number of people. Personal and child security were mentioned by more than one commenter. One of the lessons learned from this, and any other misuse of data, is that your data will almost certainly be misused, on purpose or by accident. The more data, especially in one place, the more certain. I think the freelancers who suddenly had their clients exposed to each other were somewhere between surprised and horrified. My own actions include not using my gmail account anymore, since a couple years. I use some of their products, but I don't sign in unless I need to be signed in to do something. That doesn't mean that Google doesn't still know a lot about me. Even if I never had a gmail account they would still know a large part of my network, because a large number of my correspondents use gmail. Depending on my correspondents, I might become interesting to the Chinese government in another breakin, or I might get unwanted attention from law enforcement because I correspond with on of their suspects, creating even more potential for mistakes and misuse. The larger my actual or accidental Google network, the more likely something like that might happen. There's nothing wrong with using Google. There's nothing wrong with using free services. But you should certainly think about how things can go wrong, and proceed from there. If you need your data to be online, it might make sense to keep some of your data with a paid for service (they aren't expensive) whose only interest in your data is the fee for keeping it secure and available; at least there's less temptation to play with it in creative ways and risky ways.

heed 17y ago

I'm not sure I get it. Is Google supposed to get everything right on their first try? It seems many people would say yes, even many users of HackerNews. This is very counter to my understanding of the philosophies shared around here. I always thought it was best to push an new idea out there as fast as you can and iterate as you go. Granted Google's mistake is a BIG mistake, but condemning them for one act is somewhat irrational, no?

freshfunk 17y ago
Well Google's play book used to be push stuff out as beta or a labs feature. Let only the very sophisticated users opt-in and try things out before pushing it out to the general public. This was obviously rolled out in a very different fashion. Plus they attached it to Gmail which is a tried-and-true product. Buzz feels very beta to me. If Buzz we rolled out under labs or a separate interface I'm sure that there wouldn't be as much backlash as there has been.
- frio 17y ago
  Perhaps, but I think for this particular market they had no choice but to launch big. Look at Orkut, their previous (dead) attempt at a social network. Facebook is extremely entrenched now, and there's little to no incentive to users to opt-in to something else. To attack the power of Facebook/Twitter, this was really the only way of doing it (although I agree, perhaps a Labs feature would have been a better way of introducing the concept for a couple of months at first).
  - mreid 17y ago
    I agree with you that Google has their work cut out for them trying to get into this market, but that doesn't excuse their mistake. If you think it does then I am very curious to hear how you felt when Microsoft leveraged their desktop strength to compete with Netscape in the browser wars.
  - smokey_the_bear 17y ago
    Orkut is hardly dead, just because a product isn't popular in your market doesn't mean it's dead.