3 ms·
<tinfoil> What if it's not a bug, but Google testing user response </tinfoil> (assuming Google is not stupid so Hanlon's razor may not apply)
by mtarnovan 7y ago
<tinfoil>
What if it's not a bug, but Google testing user response
</tinfoil>
(assuming Google is not stupid so Hanlon's razor may not apply)
- tobr 7y agoNot unreasonable, but then they would probably A/B test it rather than just break it for everyone. Although I guess they might be A/B testing and I’m just in the same group as OP.
- mtarnovan 7y agoWould they? Cause that would obviously give away that the break was intentional. If they break it for everyone they can still just blame it on an unintentional mistake.
- loudtieblahblah 7y agoI don't think it's an unreasonable thing to ponder.
- SCHiM 7y agoYour post remined me of this twitter thread from one of mozzilla's developers: https://twitter.com/johnath/status/1116871240432660480 https://twitter.com/johnath/status/1116871240432660480 Downthread: """ And every time, they’d say, “oops. That was accidental. We’ll fix it in the next push in 2 weeks.” """
- mtarnovan 7y agoI remember that thread now. Well, looks like standard Google behavior then.
- mtgx 7y agoNo tinfoil required. When in doubt about such issues think about whether or not the "bug" or "error" that people found in Google's solutions benefits Google. If it does, then it's much more likely than not that the "bug" was intentional. At best they wanted to test user reaction, or at worst, they were hoping it wouldn't be discovered (see Wi-Fi scanning, Safari cookies block bypass, tracking Android users' location at all time, even when "disabled", etc). Don't attribute to stupidity what can easily be explained by profit incentives (did I just invent a new saying/law?!).
- mtarnovan 7y agoLooks like capitalism has blunted Hanlon's razor :-)