Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Can you provide a precedent for Google's position being wrong other than reasoning by analogy from other telecommunications infrastructure (which we already treat differently from Google Drive shared documents)?

[Edit: your comment changed after I posted mine]

Oh, if your primary concern is that Google reserves the right to get into private collaborations and modify access to those documents, that's something other than what I'm arguing. I'm personally ambivalent (their house and their rules... If you don't like the rules don't live in the house), but I can see why people would have more concern with that situation than the situation where they block wide-cast sharing via a view-only link.




> Can you provide a precedent for Google's position being wrong

You don’t need a legal precedent to determine what is wrong. You are making the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent here.

> Oh, if your primary concern is that Google reserves the right to get into private collaborations and modify access to those documents, that's something other than what I'm arguing.

They do, and ok.

> I'm personally ambivalent (their house and their rules... If you don't like the rules don't live in the house)

This is a sentiment that I generally agree with as life advice, but is a non-contribution to these kinds of discussion.

> but I can see why people would have more concern with that situation than the situation where they block wide-cast sharing via a view-only link.

There is no difference between a small scale collaboration and what you have chosen to label a ‘wide-cast’ link, other than how many people read the document.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: