Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | napierzaza's comments login

It's an advertised perk so sure. Just like they might convince you to work somewhere because it's more geographically convenient for you or it has a day care. It offers better quality of life in lieu of cash money. I know cash is what most americans want. They want it over better health care or fairer lifestyle. But some people just want to live more comfortably instead of being able to tell people how many "figures" they make.

As for the cuts, maybe they decided to be more "honest" and cut that program and just give new hires more money?

-----


This is annoying, especially since I might very well want to rip the DVDs I own to my laptop so I can watch them on the plane without fumbling with shitty disks.

Also, are TSA agents now capable of understanding what is fair use now since they have trouble with the volume of liquid I am able to bring?

What if someone has a bunch of legally licensed AVIs ? You get side-lined for a 3-4 hours. They should open a little MPAA lawyer's office in the airport. He'll help you negotiate a settlement before you get on the next leg of your flight to Houston.

-----


This is just new people seeing the agreement. The point where he starts yelling about the fact that he might not be allowed into the store was a big indicator. A little research will show you what you can get away with.

The rest just sounds like Apple might mean the actual compiled digital book is their property. Not the actual internal content, but the functional storage and execution of it. They're trying to keep people from cloning a iBook reader, not trying to lock down the author's work. Indeed not clear and not easy to make clear.

-----


He's still a fink racist enabler.

-----


I don't understand your reasoning that they won't be there in 10 years. Money opens doors for you to make more money and to give your kids more opportunities. Unless you assume that people are essentially all addicted to gambling.

-----


I shouldn't have said "most". It's more like 34% of the top 20% fall to a lower quintile over six years according to a Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis study of households from 1002 to 2007. (http://www.minneapolisfed.org/research/qr/qr3411.pdf) I should have looked this up instead of just trusting my memory.

Still pretty significant.

-----


Yes, but I don't think they can spin it as a "rogue team" really. If it is a team inside Google. That's Google's fault. It doesn't matter whether it's Google's fault because they have poor oversight or too much freedom or because they hire people who are criminal.

-----


Google is not 100% perfect. If things aren't broken, you're not trying hard enough to push the envelope. The cost of innovation is failure.

In other words, this doesn't surprise me. And it doesn't bother me, either.

-----


It doesn't bother you if Google, the company, is committing crimes?

The cost of innovation isn't becoming a crook.

-----


No, some regular person at Google behaved unethically. If Google locked down their employees enough to prevent this (which I doubt is even possible), then they wouldn't be able to do anything good either. You're saying: one mistake in a tiny branch office, entire global company goes out of business.

-----


> " You're saying: one mistake in a tiny branch office, entire global company goes out of business."

I don't see that anywhere in the posts above.

I can't speak for other posters, but the price of letting your employees have the freedom to act according to their own initiative is that sometimes, people will fuck up, and the damage may not just be contained to your own company.

Of course, giving employees freedom also means more innovation, fast progress, and generally more happiness.

So the idea is that Google can't just reap the benefits of high-employee-freedom, they also need to bear the responsibilities for the inevitable damage it causes. These employees, acting on behalf of Google, did something bad, and caused real, quantifiable damage to another business - Google needs to take responsibility for this, and I don't just mean a mea culpa on a blog.

-----


What should they do?

-----


Well, hard to say seeing as how the jury's still out on exactly what happened.

If it was a rogue team in Google, there are a few things that come to mind:

- Google needs to refund all customers they acquired via this process and alert them that they were duped.

- Google needs to call every single business that the rogue team called and inform of what happened, and that Google is not affiliated with Mocality in any way whatsoever. Any fraudulent or deceptive claims that Google allegedly made against Mocality also needs to be addressed and recanted - to every single business that Google scraped and called.

A blanket apology and correction, on a site that the vast majority of these businesses will never read, is simply a cop out and wholly insufficient.

-----


"A blanket apology and correction, on a site that the vast majority of these businesses will never read, is simply a cop out and wholly insufficient."

What about the original post gave you the impression that the blog post was the end of things? How about giving the people who are dealing with this a reasonable amount of time do handle it?

-----


You're reading way more into my post than I intended. Like I said, the jury's still out on what precisely happened, it's doubtful Google has yet figured out just what exactly occurred.

My post was responding to jrockway, who seemed to suggest that, because employee freedom leads to innovation and Good Things(tm), that people should simply let things like this slide with an apology, and chalk it up to a price of innovation. That's a load of crap. Real, provable damages needs to be corrected where possible, and compensated where it isn't.

He also didn't seem to be able to imagine any form of remedial action more than apologizing and disciplinary action - as if the real damage caused to another business is but a detail, or something hopelessly unfixable - neither of which are true.

tl;dr: Google probably (probably) is going to make this right, especially with this much flak directed at them. If jrockway was in charge of Google, though, I wouldn't expect the same.

-----


Considering it's dead-stupid obvious to anyone with half a brain, what exactly makes you think Google isn't going to do everything you mention?

-----


>You're saying: one mistake in a tiny branch office, entire global company goes out of business.

Nope I'm trying to temper your outlandish general statements; and failing.

napierzaza said, roughly, it was Googles fault if they hired criminals and those people were acting criminally either through lack of oversight or otherwise. You said something along the lines of it being expected that Google would commit crimes and that this is merely the cost of innovation. I asked if Google inc. acting criminally bothered you and you appeared to answer that it didn't that it was impossible for them to do good without also committing 'evil'.

TBH I can't really believe anyone who values the rule of law (particular its equal application) could countenance such a position. So, do you believe that rich corporations should be immune from the laws that bind the rest of us?

Hypothetical: If an employee in McDonald's overcharges all the customers do you think that McDonald's/the franchisee is completely devoid of responsibility because it was "just an employee"?

-----


Hypothetical: If an employee in McDonald's overcharges all the customers do you think that McDonald's/the franchisee is completely devoid of responsibility because it was "just an employee"?

That's a good example. But there's a difference between harming your customers and harming your competitors. In the case of McDonalds' hypothetical actions, the solution is to give your customers their money back and a few free burgers. But what can Google do to make up for their mistake here? Go back in time and not hire the individuals that fucked up?

-----


It's fairly obvious what they should do: apologise publicly and to the people who they misrepresented themselves to.

Not in the Anglosphere where the actual people affected will never know of their wrongdoing.

Not throw their hands up in the air and blame human nature, sorry for the inconvenience.

Every act like this where they do not take a principled stand, dilutes the value of that Don't Be Evil motto a little more, until one day it will essentially be meaningless.

-----


Can we get a little perspective? It's been less than a day since this came to light.

How about giving the people who are investigating a reasonable amount of time to investigate what happened, ferret out who is responsible and and figure out how best to move forward?

-----


So what you're saying is that this corporation is made up of people?

-----


Like it or not, that is what he's saying.

-----


You know, up until this comment of yours, it hadn't bothered me that you were an employee of google defending their actions most of the time on HN. I still assumed you were being somewhat objective.

But I have finally lost that trust. It is extremely hard to believe your objectivity when you equate what happened with "pushing the envelope" and "innovation".

-----


There are many more blind speculations to make. This is just one of them. Aliens!

-----


You're right. Ethics don't exist. Let's hope they weasel out of it and learn their lesson at the same time. Instead learning that they can break the lawn AND weasel out of it.

-----


That doesn't sound to me what nl is talking about at all. He's asking what others would do if they were running Google. He's not suggesting that ethics don't exist.

-----


I don't really understand the app development Kickstarters.

Especially if there is already two apps in the store and this is a sequel to a long series. If you're making more, isn't the economic incentive of having the app in the store enough for you to invest? Did you not make enough from the first two to get started on this?

I just seems to be a case where they'd like the money up front AND the money from the store. But Kickstarter page is a good way to get a bunch of cash at a premium (or even kicked in donations that don't want anything in return).

-----


If you needed the money to fund development AND gave the funders a free copy/coupon code, then it could make sense. In this case, you're spreading the risk among the early customers, instead of taking it all yourself or needing investors.

-----


Kickstarter can also be a good way to get visibility for your app.

-----


Yeah they held back their perfect Siri-beating tech because they were sure nobody wanted to talk to their phone.

-----

More

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

Search: