4 ms·

The level of outrage being directed at google over this seems to be far greater than that directed at facebook when they made a lot of their users' information

by dc2k08 17y ago

The level of outrage being directed at google over this seems to be far greater than that directed at facebook when they made a lot of their users' information public by default.

dawson 17y ago
I think people expect/ed better from Google
philk 17y ago
Two things: 1) When your company motto is "Don't be evil" people tend to hold you to a higher standard. 2) Facebook was a place where you'd put stuff that at least some other people would see. Google, particularly search, is a place where some of the things you'd type you wouldn't want anyone to see.
- chaosprophet 17y ago
  Also, Facebook threw up a big window telling you to review the new settings, and it didn't allow you to do anything else on the site till you had checked the privacy settings.
  - jasonlotito 17y ago
    In other words: Facebook knew it's average user were less than intelligent, and they had to force them to accept the privacy settings. Google assumed it's average user cared about privacy, and so would investigate the matter themselves.
- jasonlotito 17y ago
  1) Don't be evil doesn't mean don't make mistakes. Mistakes happen. 2) Despite the mistake, the features and protections were put in place to prevent the problems reported. His comment is right on the money. Maybe not what everyone wanted to hear, but what everyone wants to hear isn't always the truth.
  - philk 17y ago
    That's awesome, but when you're Google and your entire business is based on people trusting you with their data you tell them whatever the hell will make them keep handing their data over.
  - po 17y ago
    I forgive mistakes. I don't forgive denial. As a user, I'd like to hear "I'm sorry" rather than "our users' concerns were unjustified and they don't know what they're talking about"
    - jasonlotito 17y ago
      First, they've already issued their apologies for the confusion publicly. I don't see the need to repeat what's been said. Secondly, I don't find anything wrong with what he said. Again, it might not be popular, but I can't find fault in it. After all, they can't very well apologize for things that didn't happen, and it would be insulting for them to try.
      - po 17y ago
        The leader of a company absolutely should repeat what his company's PR statement/blog/whatever said, not contradict it. The fault is that it's the opposite of his company's official statement.
  - moron4hire 17y ago
    I don't believe Buzz was a mistake. I think it was a deliberate action that had an unexpected reaction. I think the execs at Google thought that people didn't care as much about privacy as it turned out we actually do.
IgorPartola 17y ago
What the other guys said. Also: Facebook is for kids playing Farmville and posting drunk pictures. I don't care what happens on there since all they have on me at this point is pretty much my name. I use Google daily for a variety of tasks and my life would be severely diminished if I had to stop using Google, so I would rather not. However, their behavior makes me question some of their services, policies and views on who can look at what. I wouldn't say I'm outraged, but I am at least surprised at the lack of tact from Eric.
mechanical_fish 17y ago
Google messed with email. Email is one of our oldest electronic media; we all know how it is supposed to work. Changing the default privacy rules of your email inbox and address book without asking you very clearly and explicitly in advance is... well, sabotage. Also: Bait and switch. Facebook is a sandbox. People kind of understand that. I sign on to Facebook knowing that (a) I don't know for sure what it is; (b) its inventors aren't quite sure what it is, either; (c) we're going to find out by trial and error. Whereas I sign on to GMail because I want a personal email system, which despite all its flashy trappings retains the underlying semantics of email. If I wanted a social network, or another sandbox, I'd have signed up for one. And I'm not sure anyone wants a thing that impersonates a personal email system for a decade and then decides to become something else overnight without warning or clarity.
- orblivion 17y ago
  > Facebook is a sandbox. People kind of understand that. Which is why I tend to cite Beacon as their biggest failing.
- jasonlotito 17y ago
  "very clearly and explicitly in advance" This is the problem. They did ask for these things, just not clearly and explicitly. However, they did have these things in place, and people did use them. Just not everyone did. So, what does he apologize for? A mistake that didn't happen or for mistakes that did happen? Granted, the popular opinion wants them to apologize for the perceived slight, but doing so would be admitting to something that in reality, didn't happen as popular opinion would suggest. Either way, any apology would be bad. In this case, being honest is probably the best thing to do.

by dc2k08 17y ago

The level of outrage being directed at google over this seems to be far greater than that directed at facebook when they made a lot of their users' information public by default.

dawson 17y ago

I think people expect/ed better from Google

philk 17y ago

Two things: 1) When your company motto is "Don't be evil" people tend to hold you to a higher standard. 2) Facebook was a place where you'd put stuff that at least some other people would see. Google, particularly search, is a place where some of the things you'd type you wouldn't want anyone to see.

chaosprophet 17y ago
Also, Facebook threw up a big window telling you to review the new settings, and it didn't allow you to do anything else on the site till you had checked the privacy settings.
- jasonlotito 17y ago
  In other words: Facebook knew it's average user were less than intelligent, and they had to force them to accept the privacy settings. Google assumed it's average user cared about privacy, and so would investigate the matter themselves.
jasonlotito 17y ago
1) Don't be evil doesn't mean don't make mistakes. Mistakes happen. 2) Despite the mistake, the features and protections were put in place to prevent the problems reported. His comment is right on the money. Maybe not what everyone wanted to hear, but what everyone wants to hear isn't always the truth.
- philk 17y ago
  That's awesome, but when you're Google and your entire business is based on people trusting you with their data you tell them whatever the hell will make them keep handing their data over.
- po 17y ago
  I forgive mistakes. I don't forgive denial. As a user, I'd like to hear "I'm sorry" rather than "our users' concerns were unjustified and they don't know what they're talking about"
  - jasonlotito 17y ago
    First, they've already issued their apologies for the confusion publicly. I don't see the need to repeat what's been said. Secondly, I don't find anything wrong with what he said. Again, it might not be popular, but I can't find fault in it. After all, they can't very well apologize for things that didn't happen, and it would be insulting for them to try.
    - po 17y ago
      The leader of a company absolutely should repeat what his company's PR statement/blog/whatever said, not contradict it. The fault is that it's the opposite of his company's official statement.
- moron4hire 17y ago
  I don't believe Buzz was a mistake. I think it was a deliberate action that had an unexpected reaction. I think the execs at Google thought that people didn't care as much about privacy as it turned out we actually do.

IgorPartola 17y ago

What the other guys said. Also: Facebook is for kids playing Farmville and posting drunk pictures. I don't care what happens on there since all they have on me at this point is pretty much my name. I use Google daily for a variety of tasks and my life would be severely diminished if I had to stop using Google, so I would rather not. However, their behavior makes me question some of their services, policies and views on who can look at what. I wouldn't say I'm outraged, but I am at least surprised at the lack of tact from Eric.

mechanical_fish 17y ago

Google messed with email. Email is one of our oldest electronic media; we all know how it is supposed to work. Changing the default privacy rules of your email inbox and address book without asking you very clearly and explicitly in advance is... well, sabotage. Also: Bait and switch. Facebook is a sandbox. People kind of understand that. I sign on to Facebook knowing that (a) I don't know for sure what it is; (b) its inventors aren't quite sure what it is, either; (c) we're going to find out by trial and error. Whereas I sign on to GMail because I want a personal email system, which despite all its flashy trappings retains the underlying semantics of email. If I wanted a social network, or another sandbox, I'd have signed up for one. And I'm not sure anyone wants a thing that impersonates a personal email system for a decade and then decides to become something else overnight without warning or clarity.

orblivion 17y ago
> Facebook is a sandbox. People kind of understand that. Which is why I tend to cite Beacon as their biggest failing.
jasonlotito 17y ago
"very clearly and explicitly in advance" This is the problem. They did ask for these things, just not clearly and explicitly. However, they did have these things in place, and people did use them. Just not everyone did. So, what does he apologize for? A mistake that didn't happen or for mistakes that did happen? Granted, the popular opinion wants them to apologize for the perceived slight, but doing so would be admitting to something that in reality, didn't happen as popular opinion would suggest. Either way, any apology would be bad. In this case, being honest is probably the best thing to do.