3 ms·
Apples to oranges. (... and the reason Google does Drive Trash is that destroying user data is a much worse user experience than letting the delete be lazy, ev
by shadowgovt 4y ago
Apples to oranges.
(... and the reason Google does Drive Trash is that destroying user data is a much worse user experience than letting the delete be lazy, even when the user has given signal they want the data destroyed. There's decades of UX research to back that assertion; it's why "trash cans" were created in the first place as a UI abstraction.
Internal to Google, if you want to blow your whole leg off and disrupt your career by deleting some critical info, that's on you. Outside Google, they try to provide a better experience for their users).
- anticensor 4y ago> Internal to Google, if you want to blow your whole leg off and disrupt your career by deleting some critical info, that's on you. They should consistently apply the deletion policy, in fact, they should go even further and do what governments do to their own sensitive information: keep a deletion log that stores item IDs, authors and content types (but not the contents) that had been deleted along with the initiator and the date of deletion and the IP address of the machine that received the deletion. Something at Google's scale deserves ğovernment-level scrutiny.
- sanderjd 4y agoDo you think users would want them to keep such a log?