One thing they can do is show the statistical distribution of when account cancellations occur in the billing period. If it's skewed to the right, they have some things to explain.
There is no way we can be certain this "second" part to the leak is actually even a legitimate followup to the first leak (assuming the first leak was legitimate).
In the future, if a leaker wants to be able to prove a future anonymous document will be leaked they should post the hashsums in the first document, so they can be verified as authenticate followups. For all we know, this is just /b/ having fun with the first leak pastebin.
It makes google sound almost Orwellian, which is not hard to believe considering how invasive their information gathering tentacles are and complete disregard for privacy of people.
This seems like some guy who's AdSense account got banned and now he's trying to take his revenge.
If there is any proof, just go to some good journalist, like Snowden did. The journalist will know how to proceed about publishing things for maximal media attention and impact on public opinion.
Had the same thought. Not saying Google's all sunshine and daisies, but this guys is doing exactly what anyone who was lying in this situation would do....
He has yet to give a single shred of evidence, and I find it highly unlikely that after three years he doesn't have a single piece of evidence that isn't tied to his identity.
The whole article is him trying to reinforce the fact that he 'knows the inner workings of Google', by, once again, giving us literally no evidence of that knowledge... Stating that he used Google specific vernacular in his last post, but not letting us know what...
It's not as if people are hard to convince; everybody likes to watch a giant fall, just give us some proof.
Post was mostly likely made by someone making spammy and useless sites which was banned from Google Adsense and is now pissed that he has no more income.
Surely anyone believing this is being influenced by bitterness about Adsense outcomes, or a desire to see a miss-step from Google's golden goose?
I'm flagging this story.
I've not seen the decline in comment quality that pg has talked about over the past few months, but this story seems to have attracted some of the worst. This is pure drama-seeking.
No idea if real or not. but this person would be pretty easy for google to uncover if he/she didn't mask his grammar. Wrote a huge corpus with fairly unique use of commas amongst other things.
This and the other "leak" are without question the dumbest thing I've ever read on HN. If the author had proof, they would have made that available. But it's obvious this person has nothing, and this person writes like a deranged and not very bright individual. For example saying "I have proof" is about as good as saying nothing. You don't demonstrate proof by declaring it, you demonstrate it by revealing it. I wouldn't be surprised if the author was actually schizophrenic.
22 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 41.0 ms ] threadLast time matt cutts posted a comment calling the poster a fraud, the thread was flagged to hell, and it dissapeared from the front page.
What does Google need to do to prove itself innocent to the public?
Then publish them you dimwit, and cease with the endless rhetoric.
In the future, if a leaker wants to be able to prove a future anonymous document will be leaked they should post the hashsums in the first document, so they can be verified as authenticate followups. For all we know, this is just /b/ having fun with the first leak pastebin.
If there is any proof, just go to some good journalist, like Snowden did. The journalist will know how to proceed about publishing things for maximal media attention and impact on public opinion.
He has yet to give a single shred of evidence, and I find it highly unlikely that after three years he doesn't have a single piece of evidence that isn't tied to his identity.
The whole article is him trying to reinforce the fact that he 'knows the inner workings of Google', by, once again, giving us literally no evidence of that knowledge... Stating that he used Google specific vernacular in his last post, but not letting us know what...
It's not as if people are hard to convince; everybody likes to watch a giant fall, just give us some proof.
It sounds exactly like a kid trying (and failing) to use fancy words to appear smarter. I don't believe it at all.
Surely anyone believing this is being influenced by bitterness about Adsense outcomes, or a desire to see a miss-step from Google's golden goose?
I'm flagging this story.
I've not seen the decline in comment quality that pg has talked about over the past few months, but this story seems to have attracted some of the worst. This is pure drama-seeking.