[alexgartrell]

You already disclose your employer in your profile, but you're probably going to want to do it in posts as well.

As a counterpoint though, I would argue that Google Chrome using Google services (seemingly exclusively) for its sync functionality kind of looks like a business decision more so than experimentation with poorly defined standards.

[jrockway]

Yeah. I try to write as though I don't work for Google, because I know what the future looks like a few months out and am not supposed to tell anyone.

Honestly, the culture of Google is very "write software for the sake of writing software". I promise you that anything that looks evil is a mere accident; sometimes programmers don't consider the ramifications of their actions. Google doesn't want to know who your friends and family are to sell your information to credit reporting agencies; they want to know so that when you type "photos" you get photos that are actually relevant to you. (Similarly, Google wants to know your travel history so it can tell that you prefer Oneworld carriers, and when you search for flights, display results in the order that's most relevant to you.)

There's no way to prove this, though, and that's what's so frustrating. Come work for Google and you'll see :)

[luser001]

> sometimes programmers don't consider the ramifications of their actions. Google doesn't want to know who your friends and family are to sell your information to credit reporting agencies

I bet the execs and product managers realize the ramifications. If all of them profess to not realizing the ramifications, the following old quote probably applies.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

― Upton Sinclair, I, Candidate for Governor: And How I Got Licked

http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/23510.Upton_Sinclair

[joebadmo]

FWIW, I was actually pretty well convinced of this by reading Steven Levy's In the Plex.

[timwiseman]

Even if the programmer's intentions are purely about code, and even if we assume management right now is entirely benevolent, data like that is hard to take back. If it is handed over to a Google that wanst to provide "photos that are actually relevant to you" right now, it will still be there if Google morphs into one that "sell your information to credit reporting agencies"

Overall I am a fan of Google's products and current policies, and I think some of the criticisms are overhyped. But with that said, I do think a "Google is benevolent, take our word for it..." statement should be taken with a grain of salt and an eye on possible futures.

[BCM43]

sometimes programmers don't consider the ramifications of their actions.

And the google higher ups don't do anything about this because in the long run it makes them more money.

[jrockway]

Yes, that's true. Google's goal is to organize the world's information for you. To organize it, they have to collect it. This makes them money because there's a lot of information out there, Google has a nice interface for searching it, and people will pay them (via their eyeballs currently) for that tool. The more information Google collects, the more convenient the product becomes, and the more value is generated. When you generate value, you generate money.

"Don't be evil" is not just marketing copy.

[true_religion]

Aren't the higher ups at Goolge also programmers?

[Kadrith]

I like that Google does this and think it is in the best interests of the Internet and most people in involved. By creating opensource implementations and testing them we can move things forward faster; rather than letting people tie up standards in committee for years or creating something that can't be implemented well.