[ocdtrekkie]

But that's exactly what's happening to your employer right now. Millions of emails are being reviewed, misconduct has been found, and yes, lies to the public have been told.

You perhaps forget that whistleblowers have quit Google and revealed truths Google didn't want people to know. People with the same inside knowledge you have realized they could no longer square where they worked with their personal ethical standards.

We're here, today. "Just trust us, and obviously it'd go badly for us if we're lying" isn't a line that's going to work anymore, because your CEO might be in jail by the end of the year.

I'm reasonably confident all four CEOs made statements that could be viewed as perjury last week. Some of them have already been news stories since the hearing. Statements they made directly contradict factual information in a few cases.

[jefftk]

> lies to the public have been told

Link?

[ocdtrekkie]

This is getting into sea lioning territory here. And it misses the point: This isn't about lawyering out of one specific claim. It's that when you are being investigated for misconduct and deception[0], your word something is true is no longer a viable discussion point.

If you can't prove X-Client-Data isn't able to be used for fingerprinting, we should assume that it is. And just like DoubleClick data, even if it isn't used now, we should assume Google may alter the deal later, as it has done many times before.

[0]Literally the words Australia used a few days ago is "deception by design": https://www.afr.com/technology/deception-by-design-accc-laun...