3 ms·

Look, there's no reason to take this personally. Here's the original claim I took issue with: > Google does this stuff for completely altruistic reasons. You

Look, there's no reason to take this personally. Here's the original claim I took issue with: > Google does this stuff for completely altruistic reasons. You are not Google, are you? I'm saying that Google is not an altruistic company, as evidenced by their helping the NSA spy on everyone all over the world. It's highly unlikely that Google would do anything related to elections for "purely altruistic reasons". You personally may well be working for Google without any evil intentions, but that's not something I've argued against. OK?

tptacek 13y ago
Did you not read the part where he said it was his project at Google? You attacked the project. It looks like you got cowed by Daniel's response, and now are just tendentiously refusing to apologize. Maybe just apologize? People on HN get caught up in this idea that they are having 1-on-1 conversations, but really they're always writing to the whole site. Lots of people are reading this little thread. What convincing argument do you think you're making in that context? You're an anonymous person with one message ("Google is an evil NSA accomplice") trying to tell the actual person who managed the voting information project at Google that Google had malicious intentions for voting information. You look silly.
- whatevsbro 13y ago
  > Did you not read the part where he said it was his project at Google? You attacked the project. Did you read what I wrote? Once again, I'm tempted to make the distinction between Daniel and Google clear. I did not attack Daniel, and I did not attack the project. I attacked Google, or more specifically, this claim that Daniel made: > Google does this stuff for completely altruistic reasons. Here is my original response to that claim: > But of course. Just like they help the NSA rape people's privacy for purely altruistic reasons? Don't Be Evil and all, right? It's simply not accurate to claim I was attacking Daniel or his work at Google. Even if I had actually attacked the project, that would still be separate from attacking Daniel - he's just doing whatever he's told to do, and most likely without any evil intentions, as I already acknowledged. > It looks like you got cowed by Daniel's response, and now are just tendentiously refusing to apologize. Maybe just apologize? There is nothing to apologize for. It's not my problem if Daniel takes arguing against a specific claim he made as an attack against his person, or his work. > You're an anonymous person with one message ("Google is an evil NSA accomplice") trying to tell the actual person who managed the voting information project at Google that Google had malicious intentions for voting information Well, Snowden's revelations tell us that Google has been actively helping the NSA spy on people for many years now, long before the Don't Be Evil mantra lost credibility in people's eyes. I simply referred to this fact, to suggest that we already have evidence of distinctly non-altruistic actions on Google's part, and this undermines the credibility of Daniel's claim.
  - DannyBee 13y ago
    "> Google does this stuff for completely altruistic reasons. Here is my original response to that claim: > But of course. Just like they help the NSA rape people's privacy for purely altruistic reasons? Don't Be Evil and all, right? It's simply not accurate to claim I was attacking Daniel or his work at Google." This stuff = the project being referred to. I"m not sure how you can see it any other way, and as you can see, this is how other people saw it as well. "Even if I had actually attacked the project, that would still be separate from attacking Daniel - he's just doing whatever he's told to do, and most likely without any evil intentions, as I already acknowledged." It's interesting you think that i just do whatever i'm told to do, or that it is in any way like that (IE that there is/was top down direction in this case). But this is silly at this point, I think i've already adequately explained how this all functions. You are welcome to believe as you like.
    - whatevsbro 13y ago
      1) the project != why it's done 2) the project != you personally or your work or why you do it > It's interesting you think that i just do whatever i'm told to do That's how jobs work, is it not? You get tasks/responsibilities assigned to you in exchange for a salary. Doing your job doesn't mean you're being evil, even if Google or its management is. I see why/how you got upset, but I didn't attack you or your work, personally. I'm sure you did a fine job of whatever tasks you had. Just to be clear, it's certainly possible to work on something without knowing that it's not done for purely altruistic reasons. But you're right, this is silly.

tptacek 13y ago

Did you not read the part where he said it was his project at Google? You attacked the project. It looks like you got cowed by Daniel's response, and now are just tendentiously refusing to apologize. Maybe just apologize? People on HN get caught up in this idea that they are having 1-on-1 conversations, but really they're always writing to the whole site. Lots of people are reading this little thread. What convincing argument do you think you're making in that context? You're an anonymous person with one message ("Google is an evil NSA accomplice") trying to tell the actual person who managed the voting information project at Google that Google had malicious intentions for voting information. You look silly.

whatevsbro 13y ago
> Did you not read the part where he said it was his project at Google? You attacked the project. Did you read what I wrote? Once again, I'm tempted to make the distinction between Daniel and Google clear. I did not attack Daniel, and I did not attack the project. I attacked Google, or more specifically, this claim that Daniel made: > Google does this stuff for completely altruistic reasons. Here is my original response to that claim: > But of course. Just like they help the NSA rape people's privacy for purely altruistic reasons? Don't Be Evil and all, right? It's simply not accurate to claim I was attacking Daniel or his work at Google. Even if I had actually attacked the project, that would still be separate from attacking Daniel - he's just doing whatever he's told to do, and most likely without any evil intentions, as I already acknowledged. > It looks like you got cowed by Daniel's response, and now are just tendentiously refusing to apologize. Maybe just apologize? There is nothing to apologize for. It's not my problem if Daniel takes arguing against a specific claim he made as an attack against his person, or his work. > You're an anonymous person with one message ("Google is an evil NSA accomplice") trying to tell the actual person who managed the voting information project at Google that Google had malicious intentions for voting information Well, Snowden's revelations tell us that Google has been actively helping the NSA spy on people for many years now, long before the Don't Be Evil mantra lost credibility in people's eyes. I simply referred to this fact, to suggest that we already have evidence of distinctly non-altruistic actions on Google's part, and this undermines the credibility of Daniel's claim.
- DannyBee 13y ago
  "> Google does this stuff for completely altruistic reasons. Here is my original response to that claim: > But of course. Just like they help the NSA rape people's privacy for purely altruistic reasons? Don't Be Evil and all, right? It's simply not accurate to claim I was attacking Daniel or his work at Google." This stuff = the project being referred to. I"m not sure how you can see it any other way, and as you can see, this is how other people saw it as well. "Even if I had actually attacked the project, that would still be separate from attacking Daniel - he's just doing whatever he's told to do, and most likely without any evil intentions, as I already acknowledged." It's interesting you think that i just do whatever i'm told to do, or that it is in any way like that (IE that there is/was top down direction in this case). But this is silly at this point, I think i've already adequately explained how this all functions. You are welcome to believe as you like.
  - whatevsbro 13y ago
    1) the project != why it's done 2) the project != you personally or your work or why you do it > It's interesting you think that i just do whatever i'm told to do That's how jobs work, is it not? You get tasks/responsibilities assigned to you in exchange for a salary. Doing your job doesn't mean you're being evil, even if Google or its management is. I see why/how you got upset, but I didn't attack you or your work, personally. I'm sure you did a fine job of whatever tasks you had. Just to be clear, it's certainly possible to work on something without knowing that it's not done for purely altruistic reasons. But you're right, this is silly.