Google, Amazon, and Apple: Tech behemoths behaving badly

It’s been a wild and woolly time in Cringe City lately. My mailbox has been burning up with readers eager to talk about Google’s Wi-Fi surveillance, rogue hackers, ICANN’s folly, the death of journalism, and Apple censors gone wild. Here are some of the best.

Hack in the box

In the past two weeks I wrote two posts about cyber justice gone rogue: one about the parking ticket Google received for Wi-spying on thousands of unprotected wireless routers, and another regarding the “throw the book at ’em” punishments doled out to individuals like Matt Keys who are accused of doing far less.

[ Cash in on your IT stories! Send your IT tales to offtherecord@infoworld.com. If we publish it, we’ll keep you anonymous and send you a $50 American Express gift cheque. | For a humorous take on the tech industry’s shenanigans, subscribe to Robert X. Cringely’s Notes from the Underground newsletter. | Get the latest insight on the tech news that matters from InfoWorld’s Tech Watch blog. ]

The Google item inspired a lot of back and forth on whether people have a right to feel their privacy has been violated when their unencrypted Wi-Fi routers are broadcasting data into the atmosphere. Cringester H. M. falls into the camp of “people should know better.”

The point you should have been making is that Google wasn’t “hacking” to gain all that “private” information…You should be discussing the worrying fact that the many people using Wi-Fi and all the law makers writing laws seem to lack even a basic understanding of radio transmission and what must be done to make radio transmissions even partially secure or private.

Instead of focusing on Google’s actions you should have been writing an article about the uselessness of outlawing listening to what is essentially the digital equivalent of Citizen Band radios or CB’s.

Except that CB radios are designed for that express purpose. No one installs one unless they intend to communicate with strangers. People install Wi-Fi routers to share Internet access among multiple devices. The fact that these routers also broadcast data is an unfortunate side effect; it’s a bug, not a feature. The day when everyone has wireless data sniffers in their cars and on their phones is the day I might agree with that argument. Otherwise, no.

Regarding Matt Keys, who is facing 25 years of hard time for allegedly giving Anonymous access to the L.A. Times website, frequent correspondent T. B. writes:

Whatever happened to the country where parents told their children to not take things that belong to someone else? What happened to personal responsibility and self-discipline? No, I don’t think we need remorseful hackers committing suicide or stupid journalist wannabes locked up for 25 years. But I think these kids are a little big for the spanking that someone forgot to give them for taking things that didn’t belong to them.

Meanwhile, Cringe fan G. D. says the government should spank them where it really hurts: in the wallet.

I agree the DOJ penalties are completely insane. But I also think we need to kick people who do this kind of stuff squarely in the wallet. I think a judge should determine a fine, within some kind of reason, that’s tied back to the cost incurred by the affected party. …Slap him with the fine, turn the money over to the [victim], and move along. I mean the whole justice thing is about making the punishment fit the crime, right?

Exactly my point. I’m not saying Keys, if guilty, should get off scot-free. But in the relative scheme of things, what he allegedly did is closer to vandalism than grand theft.

I think ICANN?

A recent post revisits ICANN’s scheme to foist dozens and possibly hundreds of new top-level domains onto the world (for a tidy profit, natch), as well as Amazon’s desire to control domains like .book and .author. In response, reader N. S. writes:

While I understand the money motivator, not creating .books, .sucks or .anythingelse in the same way as .net, .com and .edu is as dysfunctional as Congress. On the other hand, having .books doesn’t mean everyone will associate Amazon with all books. There may be a lot of dense folks out there but they’re not as stupid as the bidding wars seem to indicate.

Unless those dense folks have been elected to Congress — in which case they are just that stupid.

In that item I also referred to current TLDs “like .aero, .music, .coop, and a dozen others nobody ever uses.” Eagle-eyed reader J. G. points out that .music is not in fact a current TLD — it’s one of the 1,900 or so that are being considered for approval. (There are eight companies vying to own that one, including Google and Amazon.)

I probably meant to type .museum, which is indeed one of those TLDs almost no one uses. Maybe I’m one of those dense folks, too.

Web journalism DOA

My latest rant about the sorry state of digital journalism — and how it’s merging with advertising — inspired this note from publisher and editor J. B., who echoes my sentiments:

I’ve been a publisher of a community newspaper and just retired as managing editor of a horticultural magazine of high regard. One of the reasons I decided to quit this year was the perceived need to provide a digital presence that would at least rival the magazine. I didn’t like where I knew we had to go. I like the convenience of the Web myself, but I see how people have become accustomed to immediate information, unfiltered by a profession that has worked to separate fact from imagination. We can make our publications work (financially) in this environment, but I don’t think our integrity will survive.

Attorney B. D. B., who runs a site focusing on technology for law offices, says the problem is not new, but the Web’s insatiable appetite for information has made it worse:

I’ve gotten offers to place articles here and there (from a vendor) years ago. If there is more of that today, it is because you guys send out email every day and have to have something to file the virtual pages. Even what I assume is honest journalism is poorly written and doesn’t really provide useful information. Then there are the endless “slideshows”, for folks who do not know how to read, I guess.

As someone who recently started writing snarky slideshows for InfoWorld, all I can say is “ouch.” Hey, there are at least some words in there among all the pretty pictures.

Apple’s dark cloud

My posts about Apple unilaterally censoring screenplays and other content flying through its iCloud drew several responses from Cringesters, some of whom were unable to duplicate the effect. Reader P. W. came up with the “duh” solution:

The obvious work-around for the prissy filters is ditch iCloud, iPhone, and other iThings until Apple grows up and plays nice.

With all the cloud options for collaboration, why email scripts anyway?

This thought occurred to J. H., production coordinator for TV’s “The Big Bang Theory,” whose teleplays also had the kibosh put on them by Apple. His team is planning to distribute scripts using Dropbox instead.

J. H. also managed to isolate what tripped iCloud’s censor sensors: It was a two-word phrase describing the manner by which dogs maintain personal hygiene.

Apple iCloud: Keeping the world safe from canine smut since 2011.

Got a beef with a tech issue? Make burgers below or send takeout to cringe@infoworld.com.

This article, “Google, Amazon, and Apple: Tech behemoths behaving badly,” was originally published at InfoWorld.com. Follow the crazy twists and turns of the tech industry with Robert X. Cringely’s Notes from the Field blog, and subscribe to Cringely’s Notes from the Underground newsletter.