5 ms·

Googles dumb machine learning is destroying peoples lives and will continue to do so for decades unless somebody stops them. They control most of the internet a

Googles dumb machine learning is destroying peoples lives and will continue to do so for decades unless somebody stops them. They control most of the internet and mobile space, it’s like having your water cut off permanently

foolzcrow 5y ago
savant_penguin 5y ago
I'm really unsure why people still decide to build their companies under Google products
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- carrolyda 5y ago
  Is there any cloud/PaaS/SaaS company without a "we can terminate your account at any time for any reason"-clause? Otherwise you still have the same problem wherever you go.
  - tedivm 5y ago
    Technically sure, but in reality that's not the case. I've personally seen people lose their GCP account for weeks over amazingly stupid stuff- if that same stuff happened at AWS I'd get a phone call from an account manager to clarify things and humans would be involved in the decision to shut things down. Google has a history of excluding humans from their processes, with no recourse for when their automation breaks except to complain online and hope someone important enough hears you. That's not something people can trust.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - lima 5y ago
    There isn't. Google is just in the news more frequently simply because they have many customers, but that doesn't make it any less of a problem (across the board, not just Google).
- belter 5y ago
  What about Google scanning Company ownership records, without authorization, adding your own residence in Google Maps as the company headquarters, and then prompting you to take over the record on their own system if you are the company owner?
- bluescrn 5y ago
  Android has a ~70% share of the mobile device market, that seems reason enough. (Although more focus on the mobile web rather than apps might be a good thing)
  - toqy 5y ago
    I haven't checked in a while, but with Apple you used to have a much better chance of people shelling out money for/in your app.
  - voakbasda 5y ago
    They only have that share because developers continue to support their platform. Too bad developer greed prevents an effective boycott of their ecosystem. If enough people stopped giving them money, they would change.
    - thatguy0900 5y ago
      To go further, any competition to Google and Apple are killed in the cradle by developers refusing to support their platform.
    - Gareth321 5y ago
      I think it's a bit more complicated than greed. Remember that the only mobile development shops in town are iOS and Android, and they're both run by tyrants. There are millions of developers who only know mobile development. Giving up their skillset to learn a whole new profession is difficult.
    - _Algernon_ 5y ago
      Your criticism essentially boils down to "Too bad human behavior is the way it is". Sure, I agree, but it's pretty unactionable.
- realusername 5y ago
  There's only two options on mobile and both are terrible.
tedivm 5y ago
They've always been like this. Back in 2005 I had a website that was popular enough to earn about $80 a month in Google ads. When I tried to cash out with $300 to pay for some college books Google cancelled my ads account claiming click fraud and kept the money. They completely ignored any attempts to contact them. In some ways I'm lucky it happened when it did, as it kept me from relying on Google services since then. Google is horrible when it comes to customer service- always has been, always will be- and it's why I'll never understand people who advocate for GCP or other Google services.
matsemann 5y ago
I wonder if the devs behind these kind of automations ever stop and think about the ethical sides of it.
- inafewwords 5y ago
  Nope. You can tell by how it is implemented.
  - rexreed 5y ago
    Exactly. You think that developers are paid to stop and think about the outcomes of what they do? They're all too busy running sprints and meeting OKRs and performance metrics and hustling design and code reviews and playing internal politics to worry about the effect of what they are doing on their users and ordinary people. Besides, even if they did have an end user in mind, it's not the "users". They're motivated by the customers - advertisers. I really found this video to be enlightening on our current techno-dystopian state: https://yewtu.be/watch?v=GWvFZ99s558 https://yewtu.be/watch?v=GWvFZ99s558
- bogwog 5y ago
  Even if they do, it’s not their responsibility to fix those problems. It’s government’s responsibility to step in and fix bad behavior that market forces can’t fix (like when it’s more economically viable to destroy thousands of livelihoods per year than to invest in human review processes)
  - matsemann 5y ago
    I do feel it's my responsibility to think of the side-effects of what I do and the consequences that bear on others. But as a sibling to you say, maybe I therefore self-select away from those kind of companies, and those not thinking or caring about those things end up taking those jobs.
    - bogwog 5y ago
      That’s because you probably have a moral compass, but that still isn’t enough. If you were a decision maker at Google, those morals would probably get you fired at some point. The people running a company have a legal responsibility to act in the interests of their shareholders. Even if making a morals>economics decision doesn’t get them into legal trouble, it can get them into trouble with shareholders, and they may be fired and replaced with someone who doesn’t have a moral compass. So if the infrastructure doesn’t have room for morally correct decisions, no amount of martyrdom from executives is going to eliminate bad behavior in the long run.
thedeadfish 5y ago

foolzcrow 5y ago

savant_penguin 5y ago

I'm really unsure why people still decide to build their companies under Google products

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
carrolyda 5y ago
Is there any cloud/PaaS/SaaS company without a "we can terminate your account at any time for any reason"-clause? Otherwise you still have the same problem wherever you go.
- tedivm 5y ago
  Technically sure, but in reality that's not the case. I've personally seen people lose their GCP account for weeks over amazingly stupid stuff- if that same stuff happened at AWS I'd get a phone call from an account manager to clarify things and humans would be involved in the decision to shut things down. Google has a history of excluding humans from their processes, with no recourse for when their automation breaks except to complain online and hope someone important enough hears you. That's not something people can trust.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- lima 5y ago
  There isn't. Google is just in the news more frequently simply because they have many customers, but that doesn't make it any less of a problem (across the board, not just Google).
belter 5y ago
What about Google scanning Company ownership records, without authorization, adding your own residence in Google Maps as the company headquarters, and then prompting you to take over the record on their own system if you are the company owner?
bluescrn 5y ago
Android has a ~70% share of the mobile device market, that seems reason enough. (Although more focus on the mobile web rather than apps might be a good thing)
- toqy 5y ago
  I haven't checked in a while, but with Apple you used to have a much better chance of people shelling out money for/in your app.
- voakbasda 5y ago
  They only have that share because developers continue to support their platform. Too bad developer greed prevents an effective boycott of their ecosystem. If enough people stopped giving them money, they would change.
  - thatguy0900 5y ago
    To go further, any competition to Google and Apple are killed in the cradle by developers refusing to support their platform.
  - Gareth321 5y ago
    I think it's a bit more complicated than greed. Remember that the only mobile development shops in town are iOS and Android, and they're both run by tyrants. There are millions of developers who only know mobile development. Giving up their skillset to learn a whole new profession is difficult.
  - _Algernon_ 5y ago
    Your criticism essentially boils down to "Too bad human behavior is the way it is". Sure, I agree, but it's pretty unactionable.
realusername 5y ago
There's only two options on mobile and both are terrible.

tedivm 5y ago

They've always been like this. Back in 2005 I had a website that was popular enough to earn about $80 a month in Google ads. When I tried to cash out with $300 to pay for some college books Google cancelled my ads account claiming click fraud and kept the money. They completely ignored any attempts to contact them. In some ways I'm lucky it happened when it did, as it kept me from relying on Google services since then. Google is horrible when it comes to customer service- always has been, always will be- and it's why I'll never understand people who advocate for GCP or other Google services.

matsemann 5y ago

I wonder if the devs behind these kind of automations ever stop and think about the ethical sides of it.

inafewwords 5y ago
Nope. You can tell by how it is implemented.
- rexreed 5y ago
  Exactly. You think that developers are paid to stop and think about the outcomes of what they do? They're all too busy running sprints and meeting OKRs and performance metrics and hustling design and code reviews and playing internal politics to worry about the effect of what they are doing on their users and ordinary people. Besides, even if they did have an end user in mind, it's not the "users". They're motivated by the customers - advertisers. I really found this video to be enlightening on our current techno-dystopian state: https://yewtu.be/watch?v=GWvFZ99s558 https://yewtu.be/watch?v=GWvFZ99s558
bogwog 5y ago
Even if they do, it’s not their responsibility to fix those problems. It’s government’s responsibility to step in and fix bad behavior that market forces can’t fix (like when it’s more economically viable to destroy thousands of livelihoods per year than to invest in human review processes)
- matsemann 5y ago
  I do feel it's my responsibility to think of the side-effects of what I do and the consequences that bear on others. But as a sibling to you say, maybe I therefore self-select away from those kind of companies, and those not thinking or caring about those things end up taking those jobs.
  - bogwog 5y ago
    That’s because you probably have a moral compass, but that still isn’t enough. If you were a decision maker at Google, those morals would probably get you fired at some point. The people running a company have a legal responsibility to act in the interests of their shareholders. Even if making a morals>economics decision doesn’t get them into legal trouble, it can get them into trouble with shareholders, and they may be fired and replaced with someone who doesn’t have a moral compass. So if the infrastructure doesn’t have room for morally correct decisions, no amount of martyrdom from executives is going to eliminate bad behavior in the long run.

thedeadfish 5y ago