It's much less ironic when Google makes you agree to an EULA waiving your rights to retaliate when they remove your content with no warning or explaination.
Folks, it's simple: if you want to ensure something stays hosted online, host it yourself.
Nope, just the legal kind. You're welcome to protest and demonstrate as much as you want, but it's unlikely Google even cares about their B2C sales model. The people who actually pay for Drive are the business customers who probably aren't subject to the same terms.
If you attempt to host reactionary material online, do not expect your hosting provider or anyone upstream from you to continue providing you service. You are too much of a risk.
Seen by who? This angle is disingenuous, because no third party is going to single out this file being on Google Drive and punish Google for not censoring it.
Admit it, this is 100% autonomous action on the part of Google to suppress ideas and opinions they disapprove of. There is zero external pressure or risk. The excuse of some nebulous toxic miasma is nothing but a fig leaf for exercising political power.
That's all well-and-good, but it doesn't save you from mob justice. Cloudflare almost had their business collapse until they took proactive action against one of their clients. Google sees the writing on the wall, and they know they can posture themselves as "preserving election integrity" or whatever and get away with it. It's nothing new, and it's certainly wrong, but it's also part of our individual freedom as enterprising Americans. This is what happens when you don't regulate the tech sector, is everyone happy now?
Even if it was 100% autonomous opinion-enforcement (which is unlikely, but I'll entertain it), it's 100% Google's right to enforce that. You're on their platform, you don't get to make the rules. If your neighbor gives you a spare shed on their lot, they're not inviting you to decorate it in political regalia and extremist logos. If you become enough of a nuisance, they're probably just going to ask for their shed back and tell you to be more respectful next time.
> Cloudflare almost had their business collapse until they took proactive action against one of their clients.
Do you have any proof of an actual business impact on Cloudflare? Some people were making noise on Twitter, but we all know how meaningless likes and retweets are. Something like a dozen people showed up to the in-person protest, which indicates that the anti-Cloudflare campaign was mostly slacktivism and astroturfing.
I don't, because I ultimately don't think their cooperation with "the mob" changed much of anything. That being said, businesses live-and-die based on public perception. There obviously must have been some financial threat (a large customer pulling out, shareholder objection, what have you) to make them cave. Whether they're greedy or truly sympathetic to the queer community is for you to decide.
"Mob justice" prevails because in the USA the government will not penalize purveyors of hate speech.
If you don't want "mob justice", START REGULATING SPEECH ONLINE. Vote in leftists who will protect the marginalized by silencing the powerful when their speech becomes oppressive.
Or deal with the fallout when those marginalized take matters into their own hands because the law doesn't shield them.
A transparent shakedown. I and those like me will continue to exercise our rights and pursue our own interests in spite of these threats of coordinated harassment.
By the way, your cries of being perpetually marginalized ring hollow, when in the very same sentence you boast of your ability to silence and damage those whom you hate.
sure, until your server will be cut off by hosting provider, DNS or ISP, but hey you can create your own internet, nobody force you to self censor yourself same as nobody forced people to get vaxxed, people chose to lose their jobs and go through social death because they like it, the illusion of choice...
I'm not sure why you decided to cut off "drive" from "cloud drive" in your second quote. From a grammatical perspective "cloud drive" forms one entity, and cutting it off so you can get a juicy quote of "your own cloud" makes no sense.
If that were the case, I'd expect that the email would say it was a copyright takedown or something, not that it "contains content that may violate Google Drive's Hate Speech policy."
To simplify people supporting the current thing ® (BLM, LBGT, climate/carbon stuff, COVID vax, Ukraine, etc) have very often non natural hair color like purple/pink/blue etc. You will hardly find them among opposition against supporting the current thing.
Yet again Google proving it shouldn't be used in the Enterprise. Not that far fetched to see a future event where a Google ML algorithm decided a corporation's fiscal earnings document didn't meet the ML model's community guidelines and locked a CFO's account.
I'm interested in how Google does this on a technical level. Anyone have insight? Do they have a database of "known hateful files" and compare the md5s or something like that? do they scan text and videos for word combinations and sentences known to be hate speech?
As always with content ID for "totally only bad things trust the authorities" there are humans behind these systems, and humans will do what they want regardless of the intent or rules of the system.
hard to have proof beyond uploading it to your own google drive, but the number of broken links when looking up the video on regular google seems to indicate a real phenomemon
Using Google Drive, or any online service, without client side encryption is increasingly dumb. The gatekeepers will force the gatekeepers to gatekeep.
53 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 122 ms ] thread"your own cloud"
not a single person called out that oxymoron, what a tragedy
Folks, it's simple: if you want to ensure something stays hosted online, host it yourself.
Admit it, this is 100% autonomous action on the part of Google to suppress ideas and opinions they disapprove of. There is zero external pressure or risk. The excuse of some nebulous toxic miasma is nothing but a fig leaf for exercising political power.
Even if it was 100% autonomous opinion-enforcement (which is unlikely, but I'll entertain it), it's 100% Google's right to enforce that. You're on their platform, you don't get to make the rules. If your neighbor gives you a spare shed on their lot, they're not inviting you to decorate it in political regalia and extremist logos. If you become enough of a nuisance, they're probably just going to ask for their shed back and tell you to be more respectful next time.
Do you have any proof of an actual business impact on Cloudflare? Some people were making noise on Twitter, but we all know how meaningless likes and retweets are. Something like a dozen people showed up to the in-person protest, which indicates that the anti-Cloudflare campaign was mostly slacktivism and astroturfing.
If you don't want "mob justice", START REGULATING SPEECH ONLINE. Vote in leftists who will protect the marginalized by silencing the powerful when their speech becomes oppressive.
Or deal with the fallout when those marginalized take matters into their own hands because the law doesn't shield them.
By the way, your cries of being perpetually marginalized ring hollow, when in the very same sentence you boast of your ability to silence and damage those whom you hate.
Not an oxymoron. It's your own service subscription which you use to store your own files, even if it's running on someone else's computer.
It could be stronger but I'd consider the above comment to qualify.
that's it at the end of the day, they can and do do whatever they like
Well I don't know why anyone would be opposed to supporting any of the things you mentioned but ok.
You can have it on Google Drive, you just can’t share it.