undefined | Better HN

0 pointsgsatic3y ago0 comments

What do you think the moral of Jurassic Park was?

If you dont know how to control what happens in the park you build, then the park will be shutdown.

In the case of Google its not hard to speed up the process of shutdown. I just encourage them to keep working on more and more mindless ivory tower trash like Pixel phones, watches etc and inject more Ads into everything. They dont have the imagination for anything else but want a pat on the head for whatever they build. Give it to them.

0 comments

Kalium3y ago

It seems to me that Google is in full control of what they've built here. They've chosen not to put in the effort to find a way to meet the needs of this portion of their user community.

On the one hand, this can be quite reasonably derided as a lack of imagination. Surely there must be a way to do it!

On the other hand, well, we as a society accept that businesses are generally allowed to decide they just don't want to be in a market segment or produce some features. Bridgestone is not compelled by law to have a store in every neighborhood. Montblanc is not forced to produce disposable ballpoint pens.

Perhaps we should treat this as Google admitting the limits of what they're willing and able to build. There is no shame in knowing your limits.

x0x03y ago

It seems likely that enabling insecure account usage would be a net negative to huge swaths of their user base.

Gmail is functionally the root of trust / skeleton key to millions of people's online lives. The only real competitor is Facebook and, for some, Apple. I think Gmail is far better (more secure, more privacy respecting, less capricious) than Facebook.

With the admission by Chad that that homeless he advocates for can't retain mobile numbers, or ID cards, or 2fa keys, I have no idea how he thinks any secure access could possibly work.

Kalium3y ago

I have the nagging sense that what we're seeing amounts to throwing one's hands in the air and exclaiming "There must be a way!"

As others have pointed out, turning off 2FA is available. Apparently that doesn't work either because the people in question forget their passwords. So I guess we should add passwords and biometrics (not available on all hardware) to the list of things that aren't going to work.

Like you, I'm left wondering what there is to anchor any level of security.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

Kalium3y ago

It seems to me that Google is in full control of what they've built here. They've chosen not to put in the effort to find a way to meet the needs of this portion of their user community.

On the one hand, this can be quite reasonably derided as a lack of imagination. Surely there must be a way to do it!

Perhaps we should treat this as Google admitting the limits of what they're willing and able to build. There is no shame in knowing your limits.

x0x03y ago

It seems likely that enabling insecure account usage would be a net negative to huge swaths of their user base.

With the admission by Chad that that homeless he advocates for can't retain mobile numbers, or ID cards, or 2fa keys, I have no idea how he thinks any secure access could possibly work.

Kalium3y ago

I have the nagging sense that what we're seeing amounts to throwing one's hands in the air and exclaiming "There must be a way!"

Like you, I'm left wondering what there is to anchor any level of security.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse