I don’t think it’s a bad policy. If someone has a new account without many subscribers or views, but suddenly has a live stream that has a pile of views, that is incredibly sus. I imagine 90% of such cases are throwaway accounts doing illegal live restreams of television, probably sports.
The problem is that in cases like this Google should swiftly (within a matter of minutes) have a human moderator look at the stream to determine if the stream is legit or not. They absolutely have the resources to do so.
It’s a great injustice to the few people who get lucky and have their legit stream blow up to have it shut down. There are also cases where someone who is already popular on another platform goes to YouTube for the first time. And of course, not handling this properly creates an avenue for harassment. If someone unpopular you don’t like is streaming, raid their channel with humans and/or bots to get it shut down.
Vice writers found that when they attempted to type in the words “annoyed” and “Motherboard,” these seemingly innocuous terms were flagged for being insufficiently inclusive.
Apparently now they’re saying you can keep G suite legacy version for free for non-commercial uses:
If you’re using the G Suite legacy free edition for non-commercial purposes, you can opt out of the transition to Google Workspace by clicking here (requires a super administrator account) or going to the Google Admin console. You can continue using your custom domain with Gmail, retain access to no-cost Google services such as Google Drive and Google Meet, and keep your purchases and data.
Sundar, my guy. If you care so much about productivity, maybe you shouldn’t have people put lots of time into products you are just going to throw in the trash after a few months. That loss of productivity is on you for having people build the wrong shit, not on the employees for not working hard enough.
Even under a capitalist meritocracy that rewarded commercial success you have to say that the Google execs are horrific failures based on how often their products succeed vs. fail.
What has Google even succeeded at in recent memory that they built themselves?
It’s all good though. We know he’s not being sincere about this productivity thing. It’s just a dog whistle for impending layoffs just like the rest of the industry.
Yeah. I’ve noticed that pattern as well. There are layoffs and hiring freezes in the news, but on the ground I see recruitment just carrying on as usual.
I mean they were simultaneously developing multiple chat/chat adjacent apps with zero cross over and minimal control from the top at multiple times in their history and this would imply that there were in fact too many employees doing unstructured work (within a strategic sense).
I suspect that their recruiters are graded on the number of hires they get. So they’re incentivized to keep the hopper full with candidates even if the company is “freezing hiring” for however long.
