LOL @ several accounts of people who work at this company selectively responding positively but ONLY to those who are already on the “Google = bad” bandwagon.
I’m extremely disappointed in the HN discussion here. The blog post is by someone wanting to compete with Google. Great. The entirety of the post makes ZERO compelling arguments about what features, guarantees, or outcomes their product will provide. In the last couple paragraphs, they mention the word privacy - okay but how so? What’s the business model? Why should I trust you?
The blog post is nothing more than an attack on Google (and other tech companies, but that comes later in the article). That’s the only “substance”.
There’s no question that key regulation is missing in the space. But what exactly is Google even doing that is anti consumer and killing competition? What anti trust laws have they broken? Should we identify them or maybe determine what is missing in our legal framework? If the author wants to compete with Google, perhaps they can share that insight. That be productive.
>Google is Cambridge Analytica on steroids.
That’s a pretty damning statement and unproductive. You want to make an emotional argument and have keyboard activists work for YOU instead of sticking to objective facts.
Disappointing this is #1 on the front page. We are turning HN into Reddit.
I’m extremely disappointed in the HN discussion here. The blog post is by someone wanting to compete with Google. Great. The entirety of the post makes ZERO compelling arguments about what features, guarantees, or outcomes their product will provide. In the last couple paragraphs, they mention the word privacy - okay but how so? What’s the business model? Why should I trust you?
The blog post is nothing more than an attack on Google (and other tech companies, but that comes later in the article). That’s the only “substance”.
There’s no question that key regulation is missing in the space. But what exactly is Google even doing that is anti consumer and killing competition? What anti trust laws have they broken? Should we identify them or maybe determine what is missing in our legal framework? If the author wants to compete with Google, perhaps they can share that insight. That be productive.
>Google is Cambridge Analytica on steroids.
That’s a pretty damning statement and unproductive. You want to make an emotional argument and have keyboard activists work for YOU instead of sticking to objective facts.
Disappointing this is #1 on the front page. We are turning HN into Reddit.