4 ms·
I don't understand why Google won't just explain what the problem was and give him a way to extract his data, even if they won't let him use Blogger anymore. Wo
by exolymph 10y ago
I don't understand why Google won't just explain what the problem was and give him a way to extract his data, even if they won't let him use Blogger anymore. Would the precedent really be so bad? They're getting some not-great PR — I feel like most companies would try to work something out.
- pg_is_a_butt 10y agothey obviously deemed the content unsuitable to host... considering that, they would have to host that data to make it available for him to extract it. it's a catch-22. you're all sheep.
- Sylos 10y agoI think, it's simply less of a hassle for Google to deal with this by way of their automated PR machinery than to get an actual human into their system. They just need to open-source one Parsey McParseface and poof, the entire world thinks that Google is their cuddly big brother who would never do such a thing as ruin a man's livelihood without really giving a fuck about it.
- amelius 10y agoPerhaps because they then have to accuse him of something, which could make matters worse.
- eumoria 10y agoThis seems most likely maybe it's not worth the hassle for them but legally releasing any illegal material back to him cannot happen so they're stuck doing essentially nothing.
- bzbarsky 10y agoBecause Google is too big to care, both organizationally (too many people, too many hands that don't know what the other is doing) and in terms of its market reach. It's much like too big to fail for banks, really: they assume they can get away with anything they do, so they have no real incentive to not do it.
- nojvek 10y agoPlus they pay obscene amounts of money in lobbying. I'm guessing they are a White House darling. I like Google, they do some good stuff but some practices are clearly just very shady. What happened to "Do no evil" google?