(Replying to PARENT post)
"You got a fancy design which may give you a big revenue boost at the cost of compromising user privacy or legal risks? Good luck with upcoming privacy and/or legal review sessions; they don't care about your product since they have no motivation to do that."
From the outside, it's doubtful that this team exists at all. Or if they do, they must watch YouTube all day instead of doing their jobs, because Google is getting better and better at compromising privacy, thanks to fancy designs/dark patterns: https://www.forbrukerradet.no/undersokelse/2018/every-step-y...
It looks to me like you have no clue what your own company's doing but hurry nevertheless to defend them.
👤blub🕑6y🔼0🗨️0
(Replying to PARENT post)
Where were those teams when whatever the predecessor to G+ was called was launched and started sharing with your abusive ex's, people you had orders of protection taken etc. etc.?
I am sure they do review things quite carefully to avoid something too obviously illegal. But anything more than that? Color me skeptical.
👤Fins🕑6y🔼0🗨️0
(Replying to PARENT post)
Is this sort of compliance testing needed in countries with authoritarian leaders?
👤atomical🕑6y🔼0🗨️0
(Replying to PARENT post)
I'm not trying to convince you and HN users to trust Google (which seems to be impossible anyway), but at least for more than 5 years there has been a strong incentive structure for not doing something that might make "the rest of America would literally come to Google and kill them". I think this investigation would enhance this structure even further, which might be a good thing since there's still room to improve especially for keeping high level executives in check.