https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-do
nt-be-evil-from-1826153393

Google Removes 'Don't Be Evil' Clause From Its Code of
Conduct
Kate Conger
Yesterday 5:31pm

Google's unofficial motto has long been the simple phrase
"don't be evil." But that's over, according to the code of
conduct that Google distributes to its employees. The phrase
was removed sometime in late April or early May, archives
hosted by the Wayback Machine show.

"Don't be evil" has been part of the company's corporate
code of conduct since 2000. When Google was reorganized
under a new parent company, Alphabet, in 2015, Alphabet
assumed a slightly adjusted version of the motto, "do the
right thing." However, Google retained its original "don't
be evil" language until the past several weeks. The phrase
has been deeply incorporated into Google's company
culture--so much so that a version of the phrase has served
as the wifi password on the shuttles that Google uses to
ferry its employees to its Mountain View headquarters,
sources told Gizmodo.

Here's the relevant section of the old code of conduct, as
archived by the Wayback Machine on April 21, 2018:

    "Don't be evil." Googlers generally apply those words to
how we serve our users. But "Don't be evil" is much more
than that. Yes, it's about providing our users unbiased
access to information, focusing on their needs and giving
them the best products and services that we can. But it's
also about doing the right thing more generally  following
the law, acting honorably, and treating co-workers with
courtesy and respect.

    The Google Code of Conduct is one of the ways we put
"Don't be evil" into practice. It's built around the
recognition that everything we do in connection with our
work at Google will be, and should be, measured against the
highest possible standards of ethical business conduct. We
set the bar that high for practical as well as aspirational
reasons: Our commitment to the highest standards helps us
hire great people, build great products, and attract loyal
users. Trust and mutual respect among employees and users
are the foundation of our success, and they are something we
need to earn every day.

    So please do read the Code, and follow both its spirit
and letter, always bearing in mind that each of us has a
personal responsibility to incorporate, and to encourage
other Googlers to incorporate, the principles of the Code
into our work. And if you have a question or ever think that
one of your fellow Googlers or the company as a whole may be
falling short of our commitment, don't be silent. We want and need  to hear from you.

And here's the updated version, first archived by the
Wayback Machine on May 4, 2018:

    The Google Code of Conduct is one of the ways we put
Google's values into practice. It's built around the
recognition that everything we do in connection with our
work at Google will be, and should be, measured against the
highest possible standards of ethical business conduct. We
set the bar that high for practical as well as aspirational
reasons: Our commitment to the highest standards helps us
hire great people, build great products, and attract loyal
users. Respect for our users, for the opportunity, and for
each other are foundational to our success, and are
something we need to support every day.

    So please do read the Code and Google's values, and
follow both in spirit and letter, always bearing in mind
that each of us has a personal responsibility to
incorporate, and to encourage other Googlers to incorporate,
the principles of the Code and values into our work. And if
you have a question or ever think that one of your fellow
Googlers or the company as a whole may be falling short of
our commitment, don't be silent. We want  and need  to hear
from you.

Despite this significant change, Google's code of conduct
says it has not been updated since April 5, 2018.

The updated version of Google's code of conduct still
retains one reference to the company's unofficial motto--the
final line of the document is still: "And remember... don't
be evil, and if you see something that you think isn't right
 speak up!"

We've reached out to Google for comment on this change and
will update this story if we hear back.
Posted on: def2.i2p

  To: Guest
Seems like a strange change to make. Almost like they want it to be noticed.
Posted on Rocksolid Light.
--- Synchronet 3.17a-Linux NewsLink 1.108
Posted on RetroBBS

They have just been preparing for stuff like this:

https://medium.com/@serverpunch/why-you-should-not-use-googl
e-cloud-75ea2aec00de

muhahahahahaha
Posted on RetroBBS II

Anonymous wrote:

They have just been preparing for stuff like this:

https://medium.com/@serverpunch/why-you-should-not-use-googl
e-cloud-75ea2aec00de

muhahahahahaha
Posted on RetroBBS II

Wow, that would suck. But it sure sounds like the way Google deals with things. I once had a server at Server Beach (Pier 1) that became a victim to taking part in a ddos activity. Server Beach blocked the one port where the problem was originating, then contacted me to go in and resolve it (which I did). That's a much more professional way to handle things.

It really seems that Google thinks they're the guardians of the internet, when, in fact, we had an internet before Google and we'll (hopefully) have one after.

Retro Guy
Posted on Rocksolid Light.

I guess they were preparing for this:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-02/pichai-the-pragmatic-plows-into-china-and-google-workers-fume
Posted on: def2.i2p

  To: Guest
Guest wrote:

I guess they were preparing for this:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-02/pichai-the-pragmatic-plows-into-china-and-google-workers-fume

Posted on: def2.i2p

As long as google is providing all sorts of services for free people will continue to support them and love them. They provide dumbed down boring versions of services and everybody wants it. Whether they censor for china or not it won't make a difference to users. They'll just keep thinking google is the internet.

Google needs the internet to feed it's pockets, the internet doesn't need google.
--- Synchronet 3.17a-Linux NewsLink 1.108
Posted on RetroBBS

As long as google is providing all sorts of services for free

just because you do not pay money for it, does not mean that it is free. you are in fact paying with the information about you and your life, which google transforms to income.

i think it is one of the dilemmas of the internet that the hacking culture used to provide a lot of stuff (really) for free, and now ppl cannot tell the difference between this and the exploitation they subject themselves when using google et al.

Posted on def4.i2p

  To: anon
anon wrote:

As long as google is providing all sorts of services for free

just because you do not pay money for it, does not mean that it is free. you

are in fact paying with the information about you and your life, which google transforms to income.

That was sort of my point in that statement. People feel they're getting something for free, and worship the source. We know it's not really free, but many don't see that at all.

i think it is one of the dilemmas of the internet that the hacking culture

used to provide a lot of stuff (really) for free, and now ppl cannot tell the difference between this and the exploitation they subject themselves when using google et al.

Remember a while back the security bug found in open source software? All over the news was how "this is written by just two guys somewhere, not some reputable company." People repeated that and how foolish it was for customers (companies) to be using such 'lame' software when big companies could provide it. They didn't stop to think about all the bugs they never hear about in proprietary software, they just trust the big companies. Like google.

I know that's a bit off the subject, but it's the same general mindset.
--- Synchronet 3.17a-Linux NewsLink 1.108
Posted on RetroBBS

seems like a growing number of employees don't like the course of their company in this:

https://theintercept.com/2018/09/13/google-china-search-engine-employee-resigns/

Senior Google Scientist Resigns Over “Forfeiture of Our Values” in China
Ryan Gallagher

September 13 2018, 4:15 p.m.

A senior Google research scientist has quit the company in protest over its plan to launch a censored version of its search engine in China.

Jack Poulson worked for Google’s research and machine intelligence department, where he was focused on improving the accuracy of the company’s search systems.

In early August, Poulson raised concerns with his managers at Google after The Intercept revealed that the internet giant was secretly developing a Chinese search app for Android devices. The search system, code-named Dragonfly, was designed to remove content that China’s authoritarian government views as sensitive, such as information about political dissidents, free speech, democracy, human rights, and peaceful protest.

After entering into discussions with his bosses, Poulson decided in mid-August that he could no longer work for Google. He tendered his resignation and his last day at the company was August  31.  He told The Intercept in an interview that he believes he is one of about five of the company’s employees to resign over Dragonfly. He felt it was his “ethical responsibility to resign in protest of the forfeiture of our public human rights commitments,” he said.

Poulson, who was previously an assistant professor at Stanford University’s department of mathematics, said he believed that the China plan had violated Google’s artificial intelligence principles, which state that the company will not design or deploy technologies “whose purpose contravenes widely accepted principles of international law and human rights.”

He said that he was concerned not just about the censorship itself, but also the ramifications of hosting customer data on the Chinese mainland, where it would be accessible to Chinese security agencies that are well-known for targeting political activists and journalists.

In his resignation letter, Poulson told his bosses: “Due to my conviction that dissent is fundamental to functioning democracies, I am forced to resign in order to avoid contributing to, or profiting from, the erosion of protection for dissidents.”

“I view our intent to capitulate to censorship and surveillance demands in exchange for access to the Chinese market as a forfeiture of our values and governmental negotiating position across the globe,” he wrote, adding: “There is an all-too-real possibility that other nations will attempt to leverage our actions in China in order to demand our compliance with their security demands.”

    “I am forced to resign in order to avoid contributing to, or profiting from, the erosion of protection for dissidents.”

In the six weeks since the revelations about Dragonfly, Google has still not publicly addressed concerns about the project, despite facing a major backlash internally and externally. Earlier this month, Google CEO Sundar Pichai refused to appear at a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing, where he would have been asked questions about the China censorship. The company has ignored dozens of questions from journalists about the plan and it has stonewalled leading human rights groups, who say that the censored search engine could result in the company “directly contributing to, or [becoming] complicit in, human rights violations.” (Google also did not respond to an inquiry for this story.)

Poulson, 32, who began working for Google in May 2016, told The Intercept that the company’s public silence fueled his sense of frustration. “There are serious worldwide repercussions to this,” he said. “What are Google’s ethical red lines? We already wrote some down, but now we seem to be crossing those. I would really like to see statements about what Google’s commitments are.”

Google launched a censored search engine in China in 2006, but stopped o

Posted on def4.i2p