5 ms·

> the fact that so many people are upset is indicative of the growing technological entitlement mentality A mentality Google fosters constantly with virtually

> the fact that so many people are upset is indicative of the growing technological entitlement mentality A mentality Google fosters constantly with virtually all of their products. > You can get a 3 Terabyte backup drive today on Amazon The first words you see when you visit https://www.google.com/drive/ https://www.google.com/drive/ is "A safe place for all your files". > there are alternatives to using a hosting company Like what? Deeply technical p2p hosting solutions that are completely inaccessible to all but the most adept readers and publishers? > there are ways outside of the internet to distribute information Sure, but as we move most of our communication to the internet, this kind of thing becomes more and more problematic.

bronson 10y ago
The first word you see when you visit "Honest Al's Used Car Lot" is "Honest". Doesn't mean anyone should just trust it.
madmax96 10y ago
> A mentality Google fosters constantly with virtually > all of their products. This statement has no relevance to the conversation -- it doesn't magically produce any obligation for Google to act differently than it does. > The first words you see when you visit > https://www.google.com/drive/ is "A safe place for > all your files". And clearly in the terms of service (the only thing that actually matters,) it says: > Google may also stop providing Services to you, or > add or create new limits to our Services at any time. [1] Safety is subjective, that's how they can get away with this. The terms of service go on to say: > WHEN PERMITTED BY LAW, GOOGLE, AND GOOGLE’S SUPPLIERS > AND DISTRIBUTORS, WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LOST > PROFITS, REVENUES, OR DATA, FINANCIAL LOSSES OR > INDIRECT, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR > PUNITIVE DAMAGES. [1] That pretty much seals the deal. The user provides affirmative consent to all of this. > Like what? Deeply technical p2p hosting solutions > that are completely inaccessible to all but the most > adept readers and publishers? Self hosting is a thing. Again, none of this is Google's problem. > Sure, but as we move most of our communication to > the internet, this kind of thing becomes more and > more problematic. Using any service (online or offline) is inherently risky. Users are deciding to take that risk and then whining when the risk does not pay off. You remain free to distribute information however you like. I'm not saying these aren't problems -- I'm saying these aren't Google's problems. They're running a business, not a technology charity. If you don't like it, don't use Google products and encourage others not to. It's simple cause and effect: Google treats us badly, we stop using Google. Google is free to operate however they like and I'm free to stop using their services. [1] https://www.google.com/policies/terms/ https://www.google.com/policies/terms/ EDIT: s/risking/risky/
- nitrogen 10y ago
  *This statement has no relevance to the conversation -- it doesn't magically produce any obligation for Google to act differently than it does." Actually it kind of does -- saying one thing and doing another is a deceptive business practice, and deceiving consumers is generally frowned upon.
  - madmax96 10y ago
    > Actually it kind of does -- saying one thing and doing > another is a deceptive business practice, and deceiving > consumers is generally frowned upon False advertisement isn't the question here -- nice strawman. Google specifically states they make no guarantees, so they're not "saying one thing and doing another." They're saying one thing and doing that thing. The parent mentioned that Google encouraged technological entitlement -- that may or may not be true, that would be a tough thing to have a reasonable conversation about -- not that Google is making blatantly false claims about its services.
    - DougMerritt 10y ago
      It's rather unfair to accuse the other person of creating a strawman. Google was quoted above as calling the service "A safe place for all your files", and deletion is clearly not "safe", and there have been court decisions saying that fine print caveats cannot completely negate the clear English part of the advertising. Of course, there have been court decisions saying the opposite, too, but that's sufficient for the OP's point to be better than "strawman" material even if, hypothetically, their argument turns out to be incorrect.
      - zardeh 10y ago
        >Google was quoted above as calling the service "A safe place for all your files", and deletion is clearly not "safe" Then most files aren't safe. A file on your computer isn't safe.
        10y ago
onion2k 10y ago
Surely the line "a safe place for your files" is only saying that it's secure from hackers and they won't be deleted by mistake. It says nothing of them being deleted if they're against Google's terms. Similarly Amazon's marketing of a 3 terabyte backup drive - the use of the word backup implies that you shouldn't rely on it as the only copy of your files. It's not a backup if there's only one copy.
astrodust 10y ago
Your house should be safe, secure, a place to store all your valuables, yet it's understood it could be robbed, destroyed by nature, or burn down by accident. You're responsible for making backups or taking out whatever insurance you think is reasonable for your data.
- angry_octet 10y ago
  There is a difference between deliberate vs accidental deletion. This was not a random act. Thus is like the fire department coming and burning down your house.
  - astrodust 10y ago
    Arson is a thing, and you should be insured against it. Plus, sometimes the fire department does set fires: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/alberta/firefighter-charged-with-arson-in-blaze-that-destroyed-alberta-railway-bridge/article29817122/ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/alberta/firefighter-char...

bronson 10y ago

The first word you see when you visit "Honest Al's Used Car Lot" is "Honest". Doesn't mean anyone should just trust it.

madmax96 10y ago

> A mentality Google fosters constantly with virtually > all of their products. This statement has no relevance to the conversation -- it doesn't magically produce any obligation for Google to act differently than it does. > The first words you see when you visit > https://www.google.com/drive/ is "A safe place for > all your files". And clearly in the terms of service (the only thing that actually matters,) it says: > Google may also stop providing Services to you, or > add or create new limits to our Services at any time. [1] Safety is subjective, that's how they can get away with this. The terms of service go on to say: > WHEN PERMITTED BY LAW, GOOGLE, AND GOOGLE’S SUPPLIERS > AND DISTRIBUTORS, WILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LOST > PROFITS, REVENUES, OR DATA, FINANCIAL LOSSES OR > INDIRECT, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR > PUNITIVE DAMAGES. [1] That pretty much seals the deal. The user provides affirmative consent to all of this. > Like what? Deeply technical p2p hosting solutions > that are completely inaccessible to all but the most > adept readers and publishers? Self hosting is a thing. Again, none of this is Google's problem. > Sure, but as we move most of our communication to > the internet, this kind of thing becomes more and > more problematic. Using any service (online or offline) is inherently risky. Users are deciding to take that risk and then whining when the risk does not pay off. You remain free to distribute information however you like. I'm not saying these aren't problems -- I'm saying these aren't Google's problems. They're running a business, not a technology charity. If you don't like it, don't use Google products and encourage others not to. It's simple cause and effect: Google treats us badly, we stop using Google. Google is free to operate however they like and I'm free to stop using their services. [1] https://www.google.com/policies/terms/ https://www.google.com/policies/terms/ EDIT: s/risking/risky/

nitrogen 10y ago
*This statement has no relevance to the conversation -- it doesn't magically produce any obligation for Google to act differently than it does." Actually it kind of does -- saying one thing and doing another is a deceptive business practice, and deceiving consumers is generally frowned upon.
- madmax96 10y ago
  > Actually it kind of does -- saying one thing and doing > another is a deceptive business practice, and deceiving > consumers is generally frowned upon False advertisement isn't the question here -- nice strawman. Google specifically states they make no guarantees, so they're not "saying one thing and doing another." They're saying one thing and doing that thing. The parent mentioned that Google encouraged technological entitlement -- that may or may not be true, that would be a tough thing to have a reasonable conversation about -- not that Google is making blatantly false claims about its services.
  - DougMerritt 10y ago
    It's rather unfair to accuse the other person of creating a strawman. Google was quoted above as calling the service "A safe place for all your files", and deletion is clearly not "safe", and there have been court decisions saying that fine print caveats cannot completely negate the clear English part of the advertising. Of course, there have been court decisions saying the opposite, too, but that's sufficient for the OP's point to be better than "strawman" material even if, hypothetically, their argument turns out to be incorrect.
    - zardeh 10y ago
      >Google was quoted above as calling the service "A safe place for all your files", and deletion is clearly not "safe" Then most files aren't safe. A file on your computer isn't safe.
      - 10y ago

onion2k 10y ago

Surely the line "a safe place for your files" is only saying that it's secure from hackers and they won't be deleted by mistake. It says nothing of them being deleted if they're against Google's terms. Similarly Amazon's marketing of a 3 terabyte backup drive - the use of the word backup implies that you shouldn't rely on it as the only copy of your files. It's not a backup if there's only one copy.

astrodust 10y ago

Your house should be safe, secure, a place to store all your valuables, yet it's understood it could be robbed, destroyed by nature, or burn down by accident. You're responsible for making backups or taking out whatever insurance you think is reasonable for your data.

angry_octet 10y ago
There is a difference between deliberate vs accidental deletion. This was not a random act. Thus is like the fire department coming and burning down your house.
- astrodust 10y ago
  Arson is a thing, and you should be insured against it. Plus, sometimes the fire department does set fires: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/alberta/firefighter-charged-with-arson-in-blaze-that-destroyed-alberta-railway-bridge/article29817122/ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/alberta/firefighter-char...