5 ms·

Even for a scrappy startup, I consider this to be exceedingly unethical. Somebody paid for that bandwidth, somebody who essentially invested in Google with no o

Even for a scrappy startup, I consider this to be exceedingly unethical. Somebody paid for that bandwidth, somebody who essentially invested in Google with no opportunity to see a return on the investment. I can't picture the world where this would not be considered "evil".

Narkov 14y ago
The rules were set by the supplier and they played within the rules. Don't play the game if you don't like the outcome.
- rtpg 14y ago
  Ethics aren't about the "rules".
  - jchavannes 14y ago
    You will always have bad people. The more people that exploit the system, the faster the system will change to be more 'fair', otherwise you're just handicapping yourself. Look at all the patent lawsuits. As they said in my business ethics class: ethics schmethics.
    - tedsanders 14y ago
      (1) It's not clear that acting unethically will lead to better rules and more ethical outcomes, in general [and actually, in some cases the opposite will happen - if you're corrupt it makes it easier for others to be corrupt] (2) Handicapping yourself is the whole idea behind ethics and morality. Sometimes it's more important to do the right thing than the selfish thing. Attitudes like yours are so disheartening to read. I totally disagree with your sentiment.
      - jchavannes 14y ago
        Moral != Ethical. I'm guessing you think Foxconn replacing workers with robots is bad too?
        tedsanders 14y ago
        How is moral different from ethical? In my mind, they are pretty synonymous. And no, I don't think Foxconn is bad for replacing workers with robots. Why would I?
- jdotjdot 14y ago
  Strictly obeying the rules != good faith
Confusion 14y ago
I think it's funny how you start about ethics and then immediately follow by talking about money. Whether it was unethical depends on whether anyone suffered negative consequences and whether Google knew, or could foresee that. For all we know the bandwidth was available, couldn't be sold to anyone else for lack of customers and would simply have gone unutilized if Google hadn't used it.
- randallsquared 14y ago
  > I think it's funny how you start about ethics and then immediately follow by talking about money. Why would that be funny? A lot of ethics is about not destroying someone else's value. Value is measured in money.
  - Confusion 14y ago
    Money is a measurement of value, like popularity is a measurement of skill. They're both poor measurements, but very easy to apply, they cater to everyone's understanding and there's undeniably a correlation. Therefor they get used a lot and people lose sight of how poor they are in many situations. Numbers also allow us to decouple from the ethics of the situation. Take healthcare. You would not put a price on your own life: it is priceless to you. Nevertheless we put prices on other people's lives, because it is the easy way out, is accepted by almost everyone and allows us to avoid having to answer nasty questions. No one wants to honestly say someone unknown is worth nothing to them to keep alive. So you say you will only support health care up to $10K a year, because you know the chance a loved one will ever need more is extremely small. You talk abstract numbers to prevent from having to admit to yourself that you just don't give a damn. That wouldn't fit in with our ethics, would it?
    - justinsteele 14y ago
      People talk numbers because money/supplies are finite. We can't spend 200 million trying to save one person, as that will simply create a lack of resources for every other person who needs care...
flyinRyan 14y ago
You're completely right, but many of us realized "don't be evil" was nonsense long ago. That ones who need to hear your message would defend Google as not being evil no matter what they did (as you're already seeing in response to your post).
- pyre 14y ago
  This just seems like you patting yourself on the back for 'realizing the Don't Be Evil was BS.' A lot of people on this forum would see this as a clever hack regardless of who did it. The fact that you bring up the whole "Don't Be Evil" bit and then immediately reference yourself is telling.
  - flyinRyan 14y ago
    There's a lot of projecting in your post. I'm not patting myself on the back for seeing the obvious. I'm frustrated that other, otherwise very intelligent people, are so blind to it.

Narkov 14y ago

The rules were set by the supplier and they played within the rules. Don't play the game if you don't like the outcome.

rtpg 14y ago
Ethics aren't about the "rules".
- jchavannes 14y ago
  You will always have bad people. The more people that exploit the system, the faster the system will change to be more 'fair', otherwise you're just handicapping yourself. Look at all the patent lawsuits. As they said in my business ethics class: ethics schmethics.
  - tedsanders 14y ago
    (1) It's not clear that acting unethically will lead to better rules and more ethical outcomes, in general [and actually, in some cases the opposite will happen - if you're corrupt it makes it easier for others to be corrupt] (2) Handicapping yourself is the whole idea behind ethics and morality. Sometimes it's more important to do the right thing than the selfish thing. Attitudes like yours are so disheartening to read. I totally disagree with your sentiment.
    - jchavannes 14y ago
      Moral != Ethical. I'm guessing you think Foxconn replacing workers with robots is bad too?
      - tedsanders 14y ago
        How is moral different from ethical? In my mind, they are pretty synonymous. And no, I don't think Foxconn is bad for replacing workers with robots. Why would I?
jdotjdot 14y ago
Strictly obeying the rules != good faith

Confusion 14y ago

I think it's funny how you start about ethics and then immediately follow by talking about money. Whether it was unethical depends on whether anyone suffered negative consequences and whether Google knew, or could foresee that. For all we know the bandwidth was available, couldn't be sold to anyone else for lack of customers and would simply have gone unutilized if Google hadn't used it.

randallsquared 14y ago
> I think it's funny how you start about ethics and then immediately follow by talking about money. Why would that be funny? A lot of ethics is about not destroying someone else's value. Value is measured in money.
- Confusion 14y ago
  Money is a measurement of value, like popularity is a measurement of skill. They're both poor measurements, but very easy to apply, they cater to everyone's understanding and there's undeniably a correlation. Therefor they get used a lot and people lose sight of how poor they are in many situations. Numbers also allow us to decouple from the ethics of the situation. Take healthcare. You would not put a price on your own life: it is priceless to you. Nevertheless we put prices on other people's lives, because it is the easy way out, is accepted by almost everyone and allows us to avoid having to answer nasty questions. No one wants to honestly say someone unknown is worth nothing to them to keep alive. So you say you will only support health care up to $10K a year, because you know the chance a loved one will ever need more is extremely small. You talk abstract numbers to prevent from having to admit to yourself that you just don't give a damn. That wouldn't fit in with our ethics, would it?
  - justinsteele 14y ago
    People talk numbers because money/supplies are finite. We can't spend 200 million trying to save one person, as that will simply create a lack of resources for every other person who needs care...

flyinRyan 14y ago

You're completely right, but many of us realized "don't be evil" was nonsense long ago. That ones who need to hear your message would defend Google as not being evil no matter what they did (as you're already seeing in response to your post).

pyre 14y ago
This just seems like you patting yourself on the back for 'realizing the Don't Be Evil was BS.' A lot of people on this forum would see this as a clever hack regardless of who did it. The fact that you bring up the whole "Don't Be Evil" bit and then immediately reference yourself is telling.
- flyinRyan 14y ago
  There's a lot of projecting in your post. I'm not patting myself on the back for seeing the obvious. I'm frustrated that other, otherwise very intelligent people, are so blind to it.