Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by probably_wrong on Thursday March 26, 2015 @07:03AM
(#9268776)
Those that already read the "What If?" section might want to jump to 7:10, which is when he explains what happens after he publishes the article about punchcards[1]. I mean, it's a nice talk, and if you haven't read the article then totally watch it, but as I already read it...
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by eitally on Thursday March 26, 2015 @09:27AM
(#9269353)
Rolling backup is at least one use case. This is why they only guarantee data destruction after 180 days (at least per the last document I read about it) for Apps customers.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by downandout on Thursday March 26, 2015 @05:32AM
(#9268541)
I'm sort of confused by this gif. I wouldn't look at it and say "that girl turning her head in one direction repeatedly means no comment". If it were funny, and actually had some sort of "denied" slant to it, then fine, but this particular gif makes no sense to me as a response to a request for comment. I guess when you have as much money as Google does you can be as disrespectful to reporters as you like, but at least try to be entertaining.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by gadders on Thursday March 26, 2015 @06:34AM
(#9268697)
If you really want to decode the comment, it looks like it's from the Disney Show "Good Luck Charlie" [1] and the actress in the clip is Mia Talerico. You could watch every episode to try and find out what she was saying.
I know this because I have a nine year old daughter (but to be fair, it's not the worst show Disney make).
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by halflings on Thursday March 26, 2015 @05:10AM
(#9268483)
Reminds me of the GIF Detectify got from Google after getting into their production servers because of a vulnerability in the "Google Toolbar" portal [1] :
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by downandout on Thursday March 26, 2015 @06:27AM
(#9268683)
So the security team thought it was worth such a crazy amount that they made a gif to describe it...and then they sent him $10K? That isn't very much for a major bug like that.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by arcatek on Thursday March 26, 2015 @09:23AM
(#9269314)
How can an officiel website say "even when a president tries to unlawfully refuse to enforce our laws" ? It doesn't seem very neutral, I wouldn't except such an article to challenge the decision taken by the president of a country.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by briandh on Thursday March 26, 2015 @10:10AM
(#9269701)
It's the website of the House Judiciary Committee, which is controlled by Republicans, and hence can and does challenge the President. In turn, the White House website, which is controlled by Democrats, can and does challenge Congress.
Both sites could, of course, adopt a stance of editorial neutrality. I would prefer they not, though -- both are fundamentally political organizations, so to do so would be eliding their true nature.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by pandler on Thursday March 26, 2015 @10:26AM
(#9269814)
Not to mention that the whole purpose for the three branches of government is so that each branch will "check and balance" the other branches. The fundamental structure of the system is based on the premise that each branch should not be neutral with regards to the other branches.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by nostrademons on Thursday March 26, 2015 @05:21AM
(#9268514)
Doesn't surprise me. I released a couple easter eggs when I was at Google (notably [festivus] and [let it snow]), and the official response PR prepared for one of them was a poem. It's part of Google's quirky culture.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by jug on Thursday March 26, 2015 @08:04AM
(#9268936)
Google also did this when they had the Google Toolbar remote exploit vulnerability reported and the guy asked about the reward, a good read on its own:
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by bshimmin on Thursday March 26, 2015 @05:53AM
(#9268600)
Am I alone in thinking this is utterly infantile behaviour?
It makes me rather sad that the art of correspondence (the beautiful letters of bygone times) is now gradually being replaced with Facebook Messenger and animated GIFs.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by dctoedt on Thursday March 26, 2015 @06:09AM
(#9268640)
This particular one is a funny-once, as Manny the narrator character said to Mike the newly-conscious computer in Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.
(Manny also said something like, the second time it's half-funny, with a geometric progression downward.)
It's possible to look at the glass as half-full: People can still write nice letters, and sometimes do (often by email), but they also have other avenues of creative expression.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by A_COMPUTER on Thursday March 26, 2015 @08:50PM
(#9274181)
I am a huge, huge fan of imageboard culture, which reaction gifs are _undeniably_ derived from, but I believe just as strongly that it's not something you should let "leak" into normal communication, especially not professional communication. So yes, I agree.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by smanuel on Thursday March 26, 2015 @06:38AM
(#9268703)
If it's an exception - no. It's fun and it gives a new fresh look to big, evil corporations (but Google is not evil anyway [1]).
If it were a rule - yes, definitely infantile and weird.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by billymonk on Thursday March 26, 2015 @08:41AM
(#9269077)
A term like "infantile" when used in a derogatory manner is predicated on the idea that being young is something to be ashamed of. You should avoid it.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by paganel on Thursday March 26, 2015 @06:09AM
(#9268639)
No, you're not. Plus I thought we left animated gifs back in 2013 where they belong (or was it 2012?).
On a more interesting note, someone should revisit Giambattista Vico's theory about language. The closest that I could find on the English internet after a 30-second search was this (http://www.philosophypathways.com/fellows/fahey.pdf - PDF link):
> Vico borrows the three ages of human history from the Egyptians. As shown above, the
languages which corresponds to each are, first, the mute language of signs and physical objects;
second, the language of symbols, comparisons, images and metaphors. The third is vernacular
or epistolary language.
It seems like we're about to fall from the third stage ("epistolary language", which you mention) to the second stage, that of "symbols, images and metaphors". Now, what that means exactly I don't know.
Re:Google sends reporter a GIF instead of a 'no comment'
by deeviant on Thursday March 26, 2015 @02:04PM
(#9271796)
As somebody who has a SO who works at Google, thus giving me a bit of insight into the culture, I can factually say that gifs and lolcat-like memes have already started replacing the English language there.
https://youtu.be/I64CQp6z0Pk?t=2m59s
[1] http://what-if.xkcd.com/63/
maybe they are using it for some sort of rolling backup.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNliOm9NtCM
Thanks!
I know this because I have a nine year old daughter (but to be fair, it's not the worst show Disney make).
https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/blog.images/google/niceme...
[1] http://blog.detectify.com/post/82370846588/how-we-got-read-a...
http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/2015/3/at-the-flick-of-...
Both sites could, of course, adopt a stance of editorial neutrality. I would prefer they not, though -- both are fundamentally political organizations, so to do so would be eliding their true nature.
Where I worked nothing went to the press before legal review. It seemed burdensome but I'm sure it saved the company's hide on numerous occasions.
http://blog.detectify.com/post/82370846588/how-we-got-read-a...
It makes me rather sad that the art of correspondence (the beautiful letters of bygone times) is now gradually being replaced with Facebook Messenger and animated GIFs.
(Manny also said something like, the second time it's half-funny, with a geometric progression downward.)
It's possible to look at the glass as half-full: People can still write nice letters, and sometimes do (often by email), but they also have other avenues of creative expression.
Infantile == bad? No.
[1] http://www.cnbc.com/id/101923422
On a more interesting note, someone should revisit Giambattista Vico's theory about language. The closest that I could find on the English internet after a 30-second search was this (http://www.philosophypathways.com/fellows/fahey.pdf - PDF link):
> Vico borrows the three ages of human history from the Egyptians. As shown above, the languages which corresponds to each are, first, the mute language of signs and physical objects; second, the language of symbols, comparisons, images and metaphors. The third is vernacular or epistolary language.
It seems like we're about to fall from the third stage ("epistolary language", which you mention) to the second stage, that of "symbols, images and metaphors". Now, what that means exactly I don't know.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/31250/gifs/thumbs_up.gif
Also, I don't see why this is news. GIFs have been used like this for several years now. Reddit is replete with such usage.
It's like the President inviting me to dinner and I answer him with a "thumb's up" gif.
Or do you consider yourself more important than the president?