4 ms·

> Specifically, Google used a bit of JavaScript code – the workaround – to bypass Safari’s default blocking of third-party cookies IMHO this clearly breaks th

> Specifically, Google used a bit of JavaScript code – the workaround – to bypass Safari’s default blocking of third-party cookies IMHO this clearly breaks their "Don't be evil" principle.

sp332 8y ago
Don't worry, they're fixing it. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/21/google-seems-to-have-removed-most-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-its-code-of-conduct.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/21/google-seems-to-have-removed...
- mtgx 8y ago
  Google: "Being evil is now officially an option."
- ssambros 8y ago
  https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html "And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up! Last updated April 5, 2018"
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- 21 8y ago
  "Don't be evil" is discriminatory against evil persons. As long as you don't break the law, being evil is not illegal. They have a right as anyone else not to be discriminated against or presented in a bad light. I applaud the courage of Google to increase diversity by appealing to and allowing evil persons in it's midst.
  - sp332 8y ago
    Catching up to IBM. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5138866 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5138866
  - gervase 8y ago
    I applaud these steps, and I hope they include concrete plans for addressing the good-evil hiring gap in their next diversity report. Perhaps a community outreach program to get middle schoolers more interested in becoming evildoers? Not enough companies are addressing this issue!
maxxxxx 8y ago
The new principle is "Don't get caught".
endymi0n 8y ago
Playing the devil’s advocate here: Depending on whether you think that 3rd party tracking cookies are a feature that should be opt-out or a bug that should be opt-in, it‘s just as plausible to classify this move as a fair defense against Apple, who unilaterally decided to both not allow any other browser on „their“ ecosystem (in case you don‘t know, iOS Chrome is basically just another skin on a decelerated version of Safari because that‘s all they allow) – and then generally blocking all third-party cookies in order to sabotage their competitors. Apple‘s behaviour here is clearly the protectionism of an ecosystem monopolist that’s just as misguided, thinly disguised as privacy feature. Some prior art was when Microsoft made the Do-Not-Track header opt-out instead of opt-in in order to get a consumer edge. The ad industry as a whole decided to ignore the flag just for IE, but there wasn‘t ever a legal case on that disregard of intended behavior IIRC. I‘m not sure though who‘s more evil here and if this kind of circumvention was fair game or went too far.

> Specifically, Google used a bit of JavaScript code – the workaround – to bypass Safari’s default blocking of third-party cookies IMHO this clearly breaks their "Don't be evil" principle.

sp332 8y ago

Don't worry, they're fixing it. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/21/google-seems-to-have-removed-most-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-its-code-of-conduct.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/21/google-seems-to-have-removed...

mtgx 8y ago
Google: "Being evil is now officially an option."
ssambros 8y ago
https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct.html "And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up! Last updated April 5, 2018"
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
21 8y ago
"Don't be evil" is discriminatory against evil persons. As long as you don't break the law, being evil is not illegal. They have a right as anyone else not to be discriminated against or presented in a bad light. I applaud the courage of Google to increase diversity by appealing to and allowing evil persons in it's midst.
- sp332 8y ago
  Catching up to IBM. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5138866 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5138866
- gervase 8y ago
  I applaud these steps, and I hope they include concrete plans for addressing the good-evil hiring gap in their next diversity report. Perhaps a community outreach program to get middle schoolers more interested in becoming evildoers? Not enough companies are addressing this issue!

maxxxxx 8y ago

The new principle is "Don't get caught".

endymi0n 8y ago

Playing the devil’s advocate here: Depending on whether you think that 3rd party tracking cookies are a feature that should be opt-out or a bug that should be opt-in, it‘s just as plausible to classify this move as a fair defense against Apple, who unilaterally decided to both not allow any other browser on „their“ ecosystem (in case you don‘t know, iOS Chrome is basically just another skin on a decelerated version of Safari because that‘s all they allow) – and then generally blocking all third-party cookies in order to sabotage their competitors. Apple‘s behaviour here is clearly the protectionism of an ecosystem monopolist that’s just as misguided, thinly disguised as privacy feature. Some prior art was when Microsoft made the Do-Not-Track header opt-out instead of opt-in in order to get a consumer edge. The ad industry as a whole decided to ignore the flag just for IE, but there wasn‘t ever a legal case on that disregard of intended behavior IIRC. I‘m not sure though who‘s more evil here and if this kind of circumvention was fair game or went too far.