I am utterly baffled as well. This was literally a front-page article in the NYT, not just the online home page but front page of the paper edition [1].
It's one thing to get the attention of some Googlers on the front page of HN, it's a whole other order of magnitude for the front page of the NYT.
I cannot imagine how this hasn't become an urgent priority for Sundar himself to make sure this gets fixed and fast, at a minimum in these known situations. What could they possibly still be debating or deciding inside there at Google...? Police determined no charges, so restore the accounts. I don't see any potential risk, legal/reputational/otherwise, this would open up. Google's inaction here boggles the mind.
Has there been any confirmation of this from other than social media?
I don't understand how this could be happening for weeks (at least) and not being reported on, by e.g. the WSJ, who seem like they would be ecstatic to publicise this kind of behavior from Google.
Is there any evidence Google is actually taking any action like so some Google-apologists are quick to claim?
Are there any official statements? Basically all a see after these incidents is Google only responding when being pressed by individual reporters, and even then only in very superficial terms.
Sweeping it under the rug seems to be a more appropriate description of Google's response to some extremely serious accusations. This isn't just a random act of drunken mischief by someone that just happens to be a Google employee. We're talking criminal activities undertaken by people being paid by Google, using Google's corporate infrastructure and aimed at Google's competitors.
The front page of Hacker News is pretty much a Google hate hangoutfest -- so maybe cut some slack on this one...
I'm sure the NYT reporter was not acting malicious.
Maybe they will even issue correction or update in time. No one would argue that speed of social media and corrections is not ideal, but I would bet they are trying to be accurate and transparent with their readers.
I just seriously doubt the reporter and editors who published this info did so solely with the goal to attack Google by "promoting" a questionable study.
Gee, I wonder how the NYT got its hands on internal documents that reinforce Google’s public narrative, just days before they’re due to set out their defense in court. :)
Kind of funny how the NYT publishes the original story to generate outrage, then after successfully doing so to an extent, cherry-picks examples of the outrage in order to generate yet another article that is apparently worth publishing.
Of course some Google employees are upset, there are 85,000 of them. You could have cherry-picked ones who weren't upset as well and written an article the opposite of this if desired. I'm not commenting on the claims themselves but it's just funny how the NYT is able to completely run their own show here.
I'm really surprised that nobody from Google has made a statement yet. Even if the detective work was wrong, Google has suffered a huge PR blow. This story is all over HN, all over G+ (at least the HN circle), all over my Twitter stream (which includes some top tech journos from South Africa) and is slowly being republishing on various blogs.
Based on the frequency with which this sort of post gets significant traction it's pretty clear that no one at Google gives a crap about this issue. I find it hard to imagine that people in Google are unaware of this problem.
I often wonder if this has happened to people with more clout who have managed to pull strings to get it sorted, or if Google have just got lucky and managed to avoid hitting someone who might actually be in a position to fight back.
I just want to know why is no one willing to hold Google and Apple accountable?
Why don't journalists from e.g TechCrunch or the Verge confront Sundar point blank and ask him how can stuff like this happen and why is the only solution to blow up on social media?
That was my first take as well, but after reading up a bit on it it seems that they tried to make it go away by not charging him, when if you look at the severity of this case they had every reason to.
So they tried to sweep it under the rug by just letting the guy go.
If an employee of mine had ever snooped on end-user data and would have used that data in order to get real-world effects in the lives of those users I'm fairly sure I would have registered a complaint with law enforcement.
Google has their 'image' to be aware of, but in this case just letting the guy go may not be the best way to preserve that image.
The two pieces of information I think that stand out are:
1. Law enforcement elected not to pursue charges
2. The banned parties were comfortable enough going to a respected newspaper with the facts of their case, which, the newspaper presumably also did due diligence and sided with the users.
I don’t think that there’s really any “hidden” context here that would convince many (except maybe those who get their paychecks from big G) that google is not in the wrong.
Perhaps the hidden context here is that they also investigated the couple after the journal report and found other “violations” which were ban worthy after, not before, their case was aired publicly. I don’t think many people would consider this theoretical scenario fair either.
It's one thing to get the attention of some Googlers on the front page of HN, it's a whole other order of magnitude for the front page of the NYT.
I cannot imagine how this hasn't become an urgent priority for Sundar himself to make sure this gets fixed and fast, at a minimum in these known situations. What could they possibly still be debating or deciding inside there at Google...? Police determined no charges, so restore the accounts. I don't see any potential risk, legal/reputational/otherwise, this would open up. Google's inaction here boggles the mind.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/issue/todayspaper/2022/08/22/todays-...
reply