| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 110262 | 2010-06-09 21:48:00 | Web Giant Google Faces NZ Police Probe. | Trev (427) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1108610 | 2010-06-18 20:22:00 | Many people are not in tuned with computers other than using it. It's like saying every car owner should know how to change the oil, change a tyre, jump start it and change a blown bulb .... Yes. Perhaps not how to do the maintenance but everyone with a car should know the need to check oil, water etc and if they can't do basics, get it serviced. Ditto computers, they should find out first before obliviously doing whatever and then bleating later. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 1108611 | 2010-06-20 05:41:00 | Interesting quote from Slashdot ( . slashdot . org/comments . pl?sid=1691848&cid=32628654" target="_blank">yro . slashdot . org): What if this were a calculated marketing maneuver designed to test the waters and find out how much people really care about privacy and the possible hard-to-justify violation thereof? This is, after all, a company that would make far less money if everyone had excellent online privacy . How much people are willing to protect that privacy and how much outrage they express at real or perceived violations of it could be very important data to a company like Google . This is data that would be difficult for Google to obtain from their usual channels . Just like in politics, it has to become an "issue" and then the reaction can be assessed . A privacy matter that collects little or no directly sensitive information (thus protecting Google from potential liability) that still raises the issue and gets people talking about it would be perfect for this purpose . That's exactly what happened here . The more successful a company, the more resources it possesses, the more talent it has hired, the more difficult it becomes to believe that they'd make trivial mistakes that most Slashdotters, acting alone with an infinitessimal fraction of the same resources, would have easily avoided . Good long-term strategy looks a lot like things just happening to work out a certain way as a product of chance . It's possible someone at Google could have made the incredibly trivial mistake that caused this chain of events . What's unlikely is that among all of the managers, designers, and programmers involved in this project, not one person noticed such a mistake . |
Erayd (23) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 | |||||