
Beware of Google Bearing Gifts - civictechbae
https://notonihilism.org/2019/04/12/beware-of-google-bearing-gifts/
======
bb88
> The vast majority of classes are based on Google products: Learn to manage
> projects with Google Sheets; get your business online with Google My
> Business; discover new job opportunities with Google Search. In other words,
> Google is further entrenching their business monopoly under the pretence of
> helping entrepreneurs and job seekers.

I don't see this as any difference than any other company trying to promote
their products by giving away free classes and tutorials.

When I was a kid, there was a huge push from Apple to get their computers into
schools -- because people were more likely to buy Apple computers for the
home.

~~~
jayar95
I came here to say this. Literally every company ever does this. In marketing
it's called a value-first proposition. I don't see it as evil by any means

------
kristianc
> The reality is not quite so cutting-edge: In addition to the Google product-
> based courses, there are classes like “Design an Effective Resume” and
> “Optimize Your Energy for High Performance” and “Coach Your Team to
> Success.” These are important and valuable skills, to be sure — but they are
> not “digital skills.” The marketing of this project is an ingenious and
> insidious bait and switch: offer glitzy and in-demand tech skills, but limit
> the actual courses to the walled garden of Google products

Yes, being able to put a resume together and coaching a team is something
which is of absolutely no value whatsoever outside Google's walled garden.

Google has also probably done more than any other organization in human
history to make information on careers (and any other subject) easily and
readily available to people - without needing to use Docs, Sheets etc to do
it.

------
blakesterz
I'm not sure I agree 100% with all of it, but that last paragraph I'm 100%
with!

"Local government officials should follow Google’s example: look to public
libraries to help create equitable paths to prosperity and ongoing education."

------
fxleach
A company offering free classes on how to better use their services... oh
no... terrible... the horror...

------
et2o
This article is completely over the top. Everyone understands that Google
would use its own software as a tool in classes it teaches. It reads like the
author started with a greivance or philosophical objection to Google, and then
shoehorned some observations into an unrelated argument.

It's ironic this is hosted at a site called "No to Nihilism." This is the most
nihilistic world-view blog post that I have read in a while.

------
bb88
Mods and everyone. The anti-google slant going on in hackernews is getting
pretty awful lately.

There isn't anything particularly newsworthy or notable about this story other
than the fact the author hates Google, and then derides them for giving free
classes on their technology.

~~~
Moru
Author maybe got bitten by one too many changes or shutdowns lately? I know
most of my work lately have been to adjust our systems to whatever Google has
changed. Worst was probably the map prise hike. The kind of thing you do when
you want to get rid of some tenants.

~~~
bb88
Well then what's wrong with being honest about it and writing about their
unhappiness directly, rather than making a hit piece which demonizes what most
other tech companies do in this space?

------
zelon88
Why the flag? Seemed like a typical HN post.

Are we flagging posts for being critical of Google all of a sudden?

------
azhenley
Why would you expect a company to do something for free and with no benefit to
them?

~~~
bittercynic
You wouldn't, but hopefully you'd consider what accepting the gift is likely
to end up costing you and those you're responsible for.

------
minikites
>The money spent on this glorified PR stunt could have been used to support
the original programming of the initiative’s partner organizations, like the
New York Public Library, which already offers free classes on subjects like
basic computer skills, creating a resume, and social media marketing. Unlike
the Google Learning Center, the NYPL won’t close up shop in five months.

>Students are limited to just three classes at the learning center, a fact
that is not mentioned either in Google’s promotional material or in any of the
launch publicity.

I remain surprised and somewhat dismayed that many people still believe any
company has the best interest of the public anywhere on their priority list.

~~~
fumar
From an outsider perspective, Patagonia appears to care about the environment.
[https://www.patagonia.com/the-activist-
company.html](https://www.patagonia.com/the-activist-company.html)

~~~
athenot
It comes down to alignment.

Patagonia is deeply aligned with its customers' interests. Preserving the
natural world which its customer base enjoys and for which they buy the
company's products. That makes it an easier choice.

Google profits off of its users in ways that are not aligned to their
interests. They ride a fine line because users tolerate the inconvenience in
exchange for the product.

My rule of thumb is "follow the money". In this case, Google is a more aligned
with their customers (who pay them money) than with their users (who _might_
be or become customer of its customers). Of course, there is a nuance: Google
can't alienate its users, otherwise it will lose its customers. It's serving 2
sides at a time. But when there are competing interests between the users and
the customers, there is a bias towards the customers.

~~~
kristianc
> Google profits off of its users in ways that are not aligned to their
> interests.

See this is not clear cut. Google profits off me, primarily when I click on an
ad through search or through the display network. It's not clear either of
these are non-aligned to my interests, or that I do all that badly out of it.

If Google shows me a search ad and I click on it, generating payment for
Google, it's because I've searched for the item in the first place. I've shown
an interest in the product. That's not obviously _not_ aligned to my interest.
At best, it's kind of orthogonal. Google's entire search value prop, bear in
mind, is 'only pay for people who are interested in your product'.

If I click on an ad through the Google Display Network, again it's likely
because I've been on the website of the company that is retargeting me in the
first place. Again, not obviously not in my interest.

On the other hand, the benefits that Google provides to me as a customer are
so immense in terms of search, mapping, email, organization that it's
difficult to say that I don't do enormously well out of the deal.

I'm putting up with a company making a profit from something that I was
theoretically already interested in - in order to have an incredible service
for free.

For Facebook and other third party ad networks it is less obvious, as their
net contribution to society is arguably much more negative. But Google, it's
really not clear.

~~~
athenot
Maybe I visited a site about a product that I'm interested in, but it's not in
my interest to buy it right this second. Yet in this case Google will
repeatedly bring this product to the forefront of my mind, skewing my
perception and my decision-making.

The value proposition of advertisement is not to lay out unbiased facts to aid
me in making a decision, it's to push me to purchase a product that I
otherwise would not have purchased, or that I would have delayed in
purchasing, for example until I properly saved for it or until I really needed
it.

To summarize, it's not in my best interest to pay interest on a product I'm
merely interested in, as opposed to actually needing.

