Hacker News Reader

Comment by ProcessBlue | Hacker News Reader

This is a good example for how far Google has drifted away from having "Don't be evil" as a core tenet. No PR or marketing person with those words in mind would go near a company like Nestle. Dealing with a company whose CEO views the human right to access to clean water as "extreme" is not something Sergei or Brin would have done ten years ago.

I wonder how many Google employees today would know the meaning of "Don't be evil".

View on HN

Google literally didn't do anything evil by releasing an update to Android with the codename same as a popular chocolate product, which is owned by a company with unethical practices. This is not evil unless you specifically redefine a meaning of the word.

Oxford dictionary

evil noun

profound immorality and wickedness, especially when regarded as a supernatural force: his struggle against the forces of evil

a manifestation of this, especially in people’s actions: the evil that took place last Thursday

something which is harmful or undesirable: sexism, racism, and all other unpleasant social evils

Playing Devil's advocate, one could make an argument that by promoting Nestle, they are accomplices in their harmful (and often illegal) activities.

Personally I don't think Google is any more guilty than any other company where Nestle has advertised on, including TV channels or newspapers, but I do think the world would be a better place if companies with Nestle's track record were to be ostracized by both consumers and other companies.

Yeah, the world really would be a better place. But it is nash equilimbrium all over again and its absolutely pointless to shame one of the players(corporation or consumer). The only effectively viable path to making a world a better place is to change the rules of the game.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com