6 ms·

I think the surprising thing is that people are surprised. It took basically until now for the bloom to come off the rose. Think about that. For 20 years Googl

I think the surprising thing is that people are surprised. It took basically until now for the bloom to come off the rose. Think about that. For 20 years Google has been supposedly hiring the smartest guys in the room and all it took was free food, some ball pits and slides, contributing some tech to open source, and working on a handful of "moonshots" that haven't gone anywhere to keep the sheen of innovation going. And it worked. For 20 years. People have been saying Google is the new Microsoft for a few years but it basically took until now for that to become consensus. Microsoft, who's been on the back foot until recently, has recast themselves as the new Open Source Champion, basically using the Google playbook from 20 years ago. And it's working! If you think about it Apple is the only company that hasn't changed. There's never been a bait and switch. It's always been proprietary. It's always been confident, others would say arrogant about its products. They've never tried to cloak themselves with the mantle of open source. The only reason the tech industry uses their products is because of its inherent qualities. No one had to be tricked into liking them. And they've always been honest about this. All the "privacy cranks" were right about Google. But from 2000 to about 2015 they were casually dismissed as fringe. People really bought the "Don't be evil" slogan externally (and I'm sure internally as well). Before Facebook, they mastered the art of doing something bad then walking it back with an apology and some opt-out privacy setting that they knew no one would enable. Privacy was always an afterthought (read Steven Levy's book about Google). I'm glad everyone is seeing the light finally.

throwaway7771 7y ago
I quit Google because I could no longer be a part of the dystopian nightmare they envision as their version of the Nerd Paradise. You have no idea how strong the reality distortion field is inside of that bubble. Googlers are breathtakingly naive about how the line has been pushed by the senior leadership in order to go from being mere billionaires to mega billionaires. And it's not that hard to see the mental model and economic conditions that gave rise to this situation. Assumption 1: Technology is a universal good. Assumption 2: Centralization is the most efficient mode of operation. (this follows directly from the mission to "Organize the world's information") Assumption 3: A dumb mantra like "Don't be evil", like intentions matter, and actions don't. Assumption 4: A centralized data-driven computer system makes the best decisions. Assumption 5: If the market rewards it, it's moral. Assumption 6: The more you know about people, the better you can manipulate them (c.f. showing them "more relevant" ads) Conclusion: Google knows best for everyone, its AI should run the whole world, and since it has a crapton of money, it must be right. Just pump that 25% year-over-year growth long enough, and you have a sprawling multi-national entity that literally knows everything about everyone. What they search for, what they buy, every website they ever visit, how long they stay there, and how they interact with it, what they watch, what music they like, who they talk to and what about, who they spend their time with, and where, exactly, to the meter, they are every single second of every day, what they look like, what they like to take pictures of, what their voice sounds like, their credit history, criminal backgrounds, and soon, their DNA. The world doesn't need Google to know this shit. I don't need Google to know this shit about me in order for it to tell me what Katy Perry's second album is named. For fuck sake, we need to stop this.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  > If the market rewards it, it's moral. This is a very common stance. It's also, in my opinion, the core rot that is setting the tech industry up for a huge (and entirely justified) comeuppance.
  - FussyZeus 7y ago
    This won't be isolated to the tech industry. This is rot at the core of capitalism itself. As long as people worship money as the only real God, it's fine. But that sentiment is in rapid decline with the young.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  Your list doesn't really look that damning. All of them are true to a large extent (I suppose they wouldn't be enticing to smart people if they were completely wrong). The actual cause of Google's bad behavior isn't on the list, though it's hinted by Assumption 6. Namely, Google decided to become an advertising business at its core. When your very essence is poisoned, it's only matter of time when ethics go out of the window, and business practices become increasingly abusive.
  - meowface 7y ago
    Exactly. That's what doomed it. Same with Facebook. There is no way to run an ethical business when your core business model is advertising. It's hard enough when you run a company whose income relies on advertising (like a newspaper), but impossible when you yourself make advertising your primary feature. I honestly, personally, would not care much if Google had a lot of information about me if their goal was something other than influencing me to buy products and services. I know many others are uncomfortable with any sort of privacy loss, but for me, it depends entirely on the end goal and exact nature of the data usage. And for others, they should have an easy universal opt-out (e.g. disabling all Google Analytics tracking without having to install a Google browser extension: https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/181881 https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/181881).
the_af 7y ago
I agree with almost all of your post, except this: > The only reason the tech industry uses [Apple's] products is because of its inherent qualities. No one had to be tricked into liking them. And they've always been honest about this. This is not entirely true. There's a lot of snobbery, marketing and heavy-handed "evangelism" about using Apple products. This is more conspicuous in the case of personal use, but it happens even for professional use. I know this discussion often devolves into flamewars and endless arguing about the perceived vs real value of luxury items like Apple's, but at least you must concede this: it's a highly contested subject whether Apple's products are as good quality and reliable as their price tag and status would have you believe. Not saying they aren't -- if you press me I'll say so, of course -- just saying it's a contested issue.
- throwsurveill 7y ago
  >There's a lot of snobbery, marketing and heavy-handed "evangelism" about using Apple products. I think I covered this with: >It's always been confident, others would say arrogant about its products. They've always used effusive marketing about their products but I just think that makes them good at marketing. If the products weren't good they'd never have had any success, especially over a sustained multi decade period. Even tech people who have an aversion to the proprietary, appliance-like nature of their products started using them in the early 2000s because it was UNIXy and they realized what a pain in the ass it was to use something like Linux on their laptop or desktop. My point is that the fundamental relationship between Apple and the tech industry was honest. You might not like what Apple represents but you bought the products because you liked them because of its inherent qualities. All the people that go to work at Apple are there because they probably used Apple products as a child/teen and they want to work on them. Apple didn't court them with a con.
  - the_af 7y ago
    Well, to me the kind of marketing and evangelism needed to convince people that a standard product is actually higher end and higher quality than it actually is, and that they should buy it because of the status it signals, is a form of trickery. Yes, some call it "marketing" :) Not the worst kind of trickery, mind you, but trickery nonetheless, and definitively annoying. And yes, Apple is extremely successful at this.
katmannthree 7y ago
>Apple ... never tried to cloak themselves with the mantle of open source. No, although they weren't shy about having built OS X on top of open source technology [0]. I really miss those days, when they built beautiful computers that were rock solid hardware-wise. [0]: http://xahlee.info/i/apple_unix_ad-s.jpg http://xahlee.info/i/apple_unix_ad-s.jpg
brlewis 7y ago
> There's never been a bait and switch. It's always been proprietary. Originally, the iPhone app ecosystem was supposed to be html5-based via Safari and the open web. https://9to5mac.com/2011/10/21/jobs-original-vision-for-the-iphone-no-third-party-native-apps/ https://9to5mac.com/2011/10/21/jobs-original-vision-for-the-...

throwaway7771 7y ago

I quit Google because I could no longer be a part of the dystopian nightmare they envision as their version of the Nerd Paradise. You have no idea how strong the reality distortion field is inside of that bubble. Googlers are breathtakingly naive about how the line has been pushed by the senior leadership in order to go from being mere billionaires to mega billionaires. And it's not that hard to see the mental model and economic conditions that gave rise to this situation. Assumption 1: Technology is a universal good. Assumption 2: Centralization is the most efficient mode of operation. (this follows directly from the mission to "Organize the world's information") Assumption 3: A dumb mantra like "Don't be evil", like intentions matter, and actions don't. Assumption 4: A centralized data-driven computer system makes the best decisions. Assumption 5: If the market rewards it, it's moral. Assumption 6: The more you know about people, the better you can manipulate them (c.f. showing them "more relevant" ads) Conclusion: Google knows best for everyone, its AI should run the whole world, and since it has a crapton of money, it must be right. Just pump that 25% year-over-year growth long enough, and you have a sprawling multi-national entity that literally knows everything about everyone. What they search for, what they buy, every website they ever visit, how long they stay there, and how they interact with it, what they watch, what music they like, who they talk to and what about, who they spend their time with, and where, exactly, to the meter, they are every single second of every day, what they look like, what they like to take pictures of, what their voice sounds like, their credit history, criminal backgrounds, and soon, their DNA. The world doesn't need Google to know this shit. I don't need Google to know this shit about me in order for it to tell me what Katy Perry's second album is named. For fuck sake, we need to stop this.

JohnFen 7y ago
> If the market rewards it, it's moral. This is a very common stance. It's also, in my opinion, the core rot that is setting the tech industry up for a huge (and entirely justified) comeuppance.
- FussyZeus 7y ago
  This won't be isolated to the tech industry. This is rot at the core of capitalism itself. As long as people worship money as the only real God, it's fine. But that sentiment is in rapid decline with the young.
TeMPOraL 7y ago
Your list doesn't really look that damning. All of them are true to a large extent (I suppose they wouldn't be enticing to smart people if they were completely wrong). The actual cause of Google's bad behavior isn't on the list, though it's hinted by Assumption 6. Namely, Google decided to become an advertising business at its core. When your very essence is poisoned, it's only matter of time when ethics go out of the window, and business practices become increasingly abusive.
- meowface 7y ago
  Exactly. That's what doomed it. Same with Facebook. There is no way to run an ethical business when your core business model is advertising. It's hard enough when you run a company whose income relies on advertising (like a newspaper), but impossible when you yourself make advertising your primary feature. I honestly, personally, would not care much if Google had a lot of information about me if their goal was something other than influencing me to buy products and services. I know many others are uncomfortable with any sort of privacy loss, but for me, it depends entirely on the end goal and exact nature of the data usage. And for others, they should have an easy universal opt-out (e.g. disabling all Google Analytics tracking without having to install a Google browser extension: https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/181881 https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/181881).

the_af 7y ago

I agree with almost all of your post, except this: > The only reason the tech industry uses [Apple's] products is because of its inherent qualities. No one had to be tricked into liking them. And they've always been honest about this. This is not entirely true. There's a lot of snobbery, marketing and heavy-handed "evangelism" about using Apple products. This is more conspicuous in the case of personal use, but it happens even for professional use. I know this discussion often devolves into flamewars and endless arguing about the perceived vs real value of luxury items like Apple's, but at least you must concede this: it's a highly contested subject whether Apple's products are as good quality and reliable as their price tag and status would have you believe. Not saying they aren't -- if you press me I'll say so, of course -- just saying it's a contested issue.

throwsurveill 7y ago
>There's a lot of snobbery, marketing and heavy-handed "evangelism" about using Apple products. I think I covered this with: >It's always been confident, others would say arrogant about its products. They've always used effusive marketing about their products but I just think that makes them good at marketing. If the products weren't good they'd never have had any success, especially over a sustained multi decade period. Even tech people who have an aversion to the proprietary, appliance-like nature of their products started using them in the early 2000s because it was UNIXy and they realized what a pain in the ass it was to use something like Linux on their laptop or desktop. My point is that the fundamental relationship between Apple and the tech industry was honest. You might not like what Apple represents but you bought the products because you liked them because of its inherent qualities. All the people that go to work at Apple are there because they probably used Apple products as a child/teen and they want to work on them. Apple didn't court them with a con.
- the_af 7y ago
  Well, to me the kind of marketing and evangelism needed to convince people that a standard product is actually higher end and higher quality than it actually is, and that they should buy it because of the status it signals, is a form of trickery. Yes, some call it "marketing" :) Not the worst kind of trickery, mind you, but trickery nonetheless, and definitively annoying. And yes, Apple is extremely successful at this.

katmannthree 7y ago

>Apple ... never tried to cloak themselves with the mantle of open source. No, although they weren't shy about having built OS X on top of open source technology [0]. I really miss those days, when they built beautiful computers that were rock solid hardware-wise. [0]: http://xahlee.info/i/apple_unix_ad-s.jpg http://xahlee.info/i/apple_unix_ad-s.jpg

brlewis 7y ago

> There's never been a bait and switch. It's always been proprietary. Originally, the iPhone app ecosystem was supposed to be html5-based via Safari and the open web. https://9to5mac.com/2011/10/21/jobs-original-vision-for-the-iphone-no-third-party-native-apps/ https://9to5mac.com/2011/10/21/jobs-original-vision-for-the-...