4 ms·

About "don't be evil": It's still very much in there. From: https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/ https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of

by kyrra 7y ago

About "don't be evil": It's still very much in there. From: https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/ https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/ > And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up! The problem was that it was moved from near the top to being near the bottom (though it's own paragraph). Sadly there were lots of very inaccurate headlines like this: > Google Removes 'Don't Be Evil' Clause From Its Code of Conduct https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-1826153393 https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-do...

hanse00 7y ago
It's there on paper, but is is really still there?
- meowface 7y ago
  Was it ever really there for the entire time period between the founding and when it was moved to a lower part of the page?
  - hanse00 7y ago
    I don't know, I wasn't there the whole time :)
- kyrra 7y ago
  I am a Googler, opinions on my own. The problem with the phrase is that it is very relative depending on your meaning of evil. It's a shifting over time and varies by person. At the same time it provides a good guiding principle for Google as a whole. You need to think about users in different parts of the world with different ideas of what is good and evil, and try to cater to all of them. It's a really hard problem. That code have conduct I linked tries to explain how evil is defined and give more concrete principles to follow. From my experience, no one tries to be evil within Google, and we try to do right by our users. But when you're dealing with products like YouTube and Search with massive amounts of user-generated data, suggesting good answers that satisfy everyone and doesn't generate news headlines is impossible. We do what we can, but when you have billion user products, some people are always going to be pissed at you.
  - williesleg 7y ago
    Just give me what I search for, no filters, no bullshit.
  - harumph 7y ago
    > That code have conduct I linked tries to explain how evil is defined You don't need to define evil for us. Small children know evil when they see it. People are quite capable of gleaning a person's or group of people's intent from their actions. When you start needing to define what evil is, you've lost the debate entirely.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - adjkant 7y ago
    While valid take here, I don't think it was ever meant to be taken as a literal guiding principle that needed to be written down so clearly as much as do the second thing you said, act as a guiding principle. To me, the minuta having to be written down was a symptom of the complexity making the simplistic and guiding principle don't be evil useless, which I think mainly was caused by scale and the way the ad industry and personal data practices everywhere have evolved. No need to dig in there, but basically, I think that the fact it's still there doesn't really say much. This isn't to say the problems and scale of Google are easy, for the record. Also not impossible either of course. Curious, in your 100% personal opinion, do you disagree that the company has more or less "deprecated" it?
  - hanse00 7y ago
    I'm a Xoogler myself, I understand the struggle. And I agree that I've never known any individual Googler to be evil, or intend to be evil (Although I've seen questionable decision making at times). But whilst no one Googler is evil, the larger body that is "Google" has turned slightly further towards evil (In my personal definition of the word evil). It's still nowhere near what I would consider true evil, I would probably go back to Google one day if the opportunity presents itself. But I would argue the Google I see today is less "good" than the Google I saw 5 years ago.
  - 7y ago
FactolSarin 7y ago
Oh, and if you try to organize people speaking up, you'll be fired.
oldspleen 7y ago
Google kept deprecating its use of the phrase "don't be evil" and now almost a footnote in its code of conduct.
- mda 7y ago
  As if remaining part of code of conduct doc promotes evil. Please ...
jeremyfranco 7y ago
> > And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up! How does this fit in the narrative, when the ones speaking up (right or wrong, that's not the issue here) are being fired? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/20/technology/Google-union-consultant.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/20/technology/Google-union-c...

by kyrra 7y ago

hanse00 7y ago

It's there on paper, but is is really still there?

meowface 7y ago
Was it ever really there for the entire time period between the founding and when it was moved to a lower part of the page?
- hanse00 7y ago
  I don't know, I wasn't there the whole time :)
kyrra 7y ago
I am a Googler, opinions on my own. The problem with the phrase is that it is very relative depending on your meaning of evil. It's a shifting over time and varies by person. At the same time it provides a good guiding principle for Google as a whole. You need to think about users in different parts of the world with different ideas of what is good and evil, and try to cater to all of them. It's a really hard problem. That code have conduct I linked tries to explain how evil is defined and give more concrete principles to follow. From my experience, no one tries to be evil within Google, and we try to do right by our users. But when you're dealing with products like YouTube and Search with massive amounts of user-generated data, suggesting good answers that satisfy everyone and doesn't generate news headlines is impossible. We do what we can, but when you have billion user products, some people are always going to be pissed at you.
- williesleg 7y ago
  Just give me what I search for, no filters, no bullshit.
- harumph 7y ago
  > That code have conduct I linked tries to explain how evil is defined You don't need to define evil for us. Small children know evil when they see it. People are quite capable of gleaning a person's or group of people's intent from their actions. When you start needing to define what evil is, you've lost the debate entirely.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- adjkant 7y ago
  While valid take here, I don't think it was ever meant to be taken as a literal guiding principle that needed to be written down so clearly as much as do the second thing you said, act as a guiding principle. To me, the minuta having to be written down was a symptom of the complexity making the simplistic and guiding principle don't be evil useless, which I think mainly was caused by scale and the way the ad industry and personal data practices everywhere have evolved. No need to dig in there, but basically, I think that the fact it's still there doesn't really say much. This isn't to say the problems and scale of Google are easy, for the record. Also not impossible either of course. Curious, in your 100% personal opinion, do you disagree that the company has more or less "deprecated" it?
- hanse00 7y ago
  I'm a Xoogler myself, I understand the struggle. And I agree that I've never known any individual Googler to be evil, or intend to be evil (Although I've seen questionable decision making at times). But whilst no one Googler is evil, the larger body that is "Google" has turned slightly further towards evil (In my personal definition of the word evil). It's still nowhere near what I would consider true evil, I would probably go back to Google one day if the opportunity presents itself. But I would argue the Google I see today is less "good" than the Google I saw 5 years ago.
- 7y ago

FactolSarin 7y ago

Oh, and if you try to organize people speaking up, you'll be fired.

oldspleen 7y ago

Google kept deprecating its use of the phrase "don't be evil" and now almost a footnote in its code of conduct.

mda 7y ago
As if remaining part of code of conduct doc promotes evil. Please ...

jeremyfranco 7y ago

> > And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up! How does this fit in the narrative, when the ones speaking up (right or wrong, that's not the issue here) are being fired? https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/20/technology/Google-union-consultant.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/20/technology/Google-union-c...