[kennethn]

I'm a member of the GV team, and one of those who helps run the workshop series. In many cases, workshops are available only to employees of the portfolio because it supports more open and candid conversations.

In the case of our security videos, we've restricted them because there were discussions about particular companies' security needs that aren't appropriate to share publicly. It's unlikely the talk would have been as beneficial to our portfolio companies if people felt the need to hold back knowing the details would be made public.

As casca mentioned, we've opened many of our videos to the public and we'll continue to do so when the workshop leader and audience participants agree: https://www.youtube.com/user/GoogleVentures/videos

At GV our mission first and foremost is to serve the employees of our portfolio companies. Google as a whole is of course dedicated to improving internet security and the company dedicates tons of people and resources to that.

[fierarul]

How does it benefit GV to have that list of videos presented but inaccessible to the public?

Why not outright filter those videos and only show them to the people with the right permissions?

[untog]

Funny that within two posts we've gone from "Why isn't GV more transparent" to "Why is GV so transparent".

I agree that from a UX standpoint it isn't great, but I think it achieves two things:

1. gives a hint at what you receive when you're a GV-funded company. Something for potential companies to think about. 2. stops any conspiracy theories about the "Secret Training Videos Google Won't Let You See".