Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I'm not sure that was a particularly _critical_ article, actually. It was pretty much just describing what Google does and how it's changed. I'm not sure there's a lot of value judgement in the writing, a lot of "critisizing Google." It was just reporting something of interest (it was of interest to me, was it to you?)

But, sure, part of the motivation of writing it was presumably knowing that some/many people would find it dismaying or unfavorable to Google.

Presumably the journalists who wrote it don't have a lot of control over the NYTimes privacy polices or practices. I'm glad the NYTimes paid someone to research it, and then published it, because then it got to me and I liked the article.

I don't see any problems or surprises, this is the world.

I guess they could write an article about the history of the NYTimes privacy policy... but really, who cares about reading that so much? Although sure, they could do more to use the nytimes as an example to be more transparent.

That they didn't doesn't erase the value of the article.

(The NYT OP does (now as I read it, it may not when you did) end with an italisized paragraph mentioning that the Times "collects data on visitors" too and linking to their own privacy policy and some other information)




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: