5 ms·

The silence of googlers when articles like this come up is funny. They jump in like a rabbit, about every google post. Showing off all their google stuff. When

The silence of googlers when articles like this come up is funny. They jump in like a rabbit, about every google post. Showing off all their google stuff. When things like this come up they pretend they’re busy coding (something something api to help their ad company). We as devs made them mega corps, seriously. Even the worst privacy nightmare inducing API, was coded by someone. Money sure drives everything, people say decentralisation will take care of everything. But Web is decentralised. But somehow we as devs helped few companies to make it almost centralised. The next big tech which tries hard(web3, ipfs) will eventually become centralised again. Companies pretending to be humble, will come in to increase ease of use pull the blanket and repeat. Edit: I understand during the legal case, employees can have life changing implications for commenting on it. Well the cases can end up dragging for years. So for all those years, are we just going to keep silent? I mean if our moral compass is controlled by how corporate thinks of it, I guess we are not free after all. The next big decentralised thing is a compromised dream already. Also if you want to really make an opinion, for those who feel like voicing but cant, make an alt account. Every voice matters.

tssva 5y ago
I'm not a Googler and I fail to see the issue here. I personally find no issue with this.
- anaganisk 5y ago
  When you look it narrow, you will mot see it. But as you start to see the big picture, you start to see the similarities with our past mistakes. Companies that are so afraid of loosing their power over their consumers, will do anything and everything to keep it. If android and apple had an Open Store API, and their respective stores had the power, no problem. But closing their store apis for themself, payments to themself is bad. Do you think we would’ve had chrome and firefox, if IE used obscure APIs? Imagine Internet standards as controlled by Microsoft. They reject legit apps on daily basis without recourse. To keep it more simple, think of how US let its telecom companies have so much power over its communication needs. How it’s affecting people.
  - Phrodo_00 5y ago
    I generally agree, but this is a very weird phrase considering history: > Do you think we would’ve had chrome and firefox, if IE used obscure APIs IE did use obscure, non standard APIs. It took web developers to get tired of MS' shit and starting to code to the standards to dethrone IE from its monopoly. This also kind of implies that IE was there before Netscape which is not true.
    - anaganisk 5y ago
      Actually I was intending to make the same connection, I apologise I wasn’t clearer.
  - tssva 5y ago
    I dispute your claim that I don't see the big picture and even if I accepted it you have provided absolutely no justification why the specific action is an issue in the big picture, It is just a bunch of non-specific anti-Google rambling. I give it as much credit as I do anti-vax and anti-mask ranting I see here.
    - anaganisk 5y ago
      Okay lets talk big picture the way I see it. Two companies that run Majority of the phones worldwide, wants to stiffle competition. There is an App which I want to use on iOS but since it doesn’t follow iOS design guidelines its not allowed on appstore, the dev submitted and appealed several times. To be fair he cannot adhere to design guidelin because its a garmin glass cockilpit addon for flight simulator which is not an IOS design. Despite several appeals, he cant get thru the support. Sure big names get credit for supporting the BIG2, but what about the developers like this case?
Shubham28 5y ago
Googlers can't reply to posts like this, irrespective of where they stand on the issue, because this is an ongoing legal matter. Disclaimer - I am a Googler. P.S. Rather than passing snark comments about what others do, maybe try talking to any of them. Any employee of a significantly sized company could have guessed that.
- anaganisk 5y ago
  so you as humans are controlled from voicing your opinion by your corporate? So your moral compass depends on your employer? Edit: I did not mean to dictate what anyone must do, but as a person you are entitled to have an opinion, to stand up. If you are going to base your moral compass based on what others decide. May be one day, you wont even bother having it. Im not hatching a big conspiracy here, but we must always keep some actions in mind irrespective of what courts decide. Courts are run by humans too, and humans make mistakes.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - adtac 5y ago
    no, all he said is you can't comment on ongoing legal matters. I have no idea how you went from that to "humans are controlled from voicing your opinion by your corporate". this is pretty standard. even in personal matters your lawyer will probably ask you to shut up.
    - anaganisk 5y ago
      I made an edit to my original parent comment. Please do refer it.
- kyrra 5y ago
  Googler, opinions are my own. 100% this. Even if we come here and express our opinions, or even express them internally on discussion forums and email, or chat, any of those communications are open to discovery by the plaintiff. If the plaintiff sees any value to anything an employee of the defendant company says, said employee could then be pulled into the lawsuit, be deposed, and many other non-fun things. Well I'm sure there are many googlers out there that would love to comment on this, for our own sanity, we likely wouldn't.
squarefoot 5y ago
I'm neither a Googler and definitely not a Google fan, but it seems pretty normal to me. At every company I worked for (nothing even close to a fraction of Google) the contract I had to sign contained clauses that would give them enough rope and bullets to hang and shoot me if I did anything that could harm the company in any way, including comments, and there were no social media back then. Googlers might be forced to stay silent, possibly also barred from participating in discussions to defend the employer, which in case of a lawsuit could make sense since what they say or write could be used against the employer.
- anaganisk 5y ago
  If voicing our opinion is controlled by the corporate. Im not sure how free we are. Yes I understand the life changing implications of this. But, we every step taken back, is a mistake we might regret.
  - Godel_unicode 5y ago
    You're free to not sign. You're free to resign in protest. You're free to comment and accept the consequences. And, you're free to not care about pointless comment threads on the internet.

tssva 5y ago

I'm not a Googler and I fail to see the issue here. I personally find no issue with this.

anaganisk 5y ago
When you look it narrow, you will mot see it. But as you start to see the big picture, you start to see the similarities with our past mistakes. Companies that are so afraid of loosing their power over their consumers, will do anything and everything to keep it. If android and apple had an Open Store API, and their respective stores had the power, no problem. But closing their store apis for themself, payments to themself is bad. Do you think we would’ve had chrome and firefox, if IE used obscure APIs? Imagine Internet standards as controlled by Microsoft. They reject legit apps on daily basis without recourse. To keep it more simple, think of how US let its telecom companies have so much power over its communication needs. How it’s affecting people.
- Phrodo_00 5y ago
  I generally agree, but this is a very weird phrase considering history: > Do you think we would’ve had chrome and firefox, if IE used obscure APIs IE did use obscure, non standard APIs. It took web developers to get tired of MS' shit and starting to code to the standards to dethrone IE from its monopoly. This also kind of implies that IE was there before Netscape which is not true.
  - anaganisk 5y ago
    Actually I was intending to make the same connection, I apologise I wasn’t clearer.
- tssva 5y ago
  I dispute your claim that I don't see the big picture and even if I accepted it you have provided absolutely no justification why the specific action is an issue in the big picture, It is just a bunch of non-specific anti-Google rambling. I give it as much credit as I do anti-vax and anti-mask ranting I see here.
  - anaganisk 5y ago
    Okay lets talk big picture the way I see it. Two companies that run Majority of the phones worldwide, wants to stiffle competition. There is an App which I want to use on iOS but since it doesn’t follow iOS design guidelines its not allowed on appstore, the dev submitted and appealed several times. To be fair he cannot adhere to design guidelin because its a garmin glass cockilpit addon for flight simulator which is not an IOS design. Despite several appeals, he cant get thru the support. Sure big names get credit for supporting the BIG2, but what about the developers like this case?

Shubham28 5y ago

Googlers can't reply to posts like this, irrespective of where they stand on the issue, because this is an ongoing legal matter. Disclaimer - I am a Googler. P.S. Rather than passing snark comments about what others do, maybe try talking to any of them. Any employee of a significantly sized company could have guessed that.

anaganisk 5y ago
so you as humans are controlled from voicing your opinion by your corporate? So your moral compass depends on your employer? Edit: I did not mean to dictate what anyone must do, but as a person you are entitled to have an opinion, to stand up. If you are going to base your moral compass based on what others decide. May be one day, you wont even bother having it. Im not hatching a big conspiracy here, but we must always keep some actions in mind irrespective of what courts decide. Courts are run by humans too, and humans make mistakes.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- adtac 5y ago
  no, all he said is you can't comment on ongoing legal matters. I have no idea how you went from that to "humans are controlled from voicing your opinion by your corporate". this is pretty standard. even in personal matters your lawyer will probably ask you to shut up.
  - anaganisk 5y ago
    I made an edit to my original parent comment. Please do refer it.
kyrra 5y ago
Googler, opinions are my own. 100% this. Even if we come here and express our opinions, or even express them internally on discussion forums and email, or chat, any of those communications are open to discovery by the plaintiff. If the plaintiff sees any value to anything an employee of the defendant company says, said employee could then be pulled into the lawsuit, be deposed, and many other non-fun things. Well I'm sure there are many googlers out there that would love to comment on this, for our own sanity, we likely wouldn't.

squarefoot 5y ago

I'm neither a Googler and definitely not a Google fan, but it seems pretty normal to me. At every company I worked for (nothing even close to a fraction of Google) the contract I had to sign contained clauses that would give them enough rope and bullets to hang and shoot me if I did anything that could harm the company in any way, including comments, and there were no social media back then. Googlers might be forced to stay silent, possibly also barred from participating in discussions to defend the employer, which in case of a lawsuit could make sense since what they say or write could be used against the employer.

anaganisk 5y ago
If voicing our opinion is controlled by the corporate. Im not sure how free we are. Yes I understand the life changing implications of this. But, we every step taken back, is a mistake we might regret.
- Godel_unicode 5y ago
  You're free to not sign. You're free to resign in protest. You're free to comment and accept the consequences. And, you're free to not care about pointless comment threads on the internet.