Hacker News Reader

Comment by Someone1234 | Hacker News Reader

I agree it is helpful to involve Google so it can be changed for existing Pokemon Go users. But I don't see how Google has verified the claim, since Google themselves have yet to release a statement.

By the way, Google indorsed this comment. Believe me?

View on HN

Web of trust I suppose. I trust Nintendo and I also don't think Google would allow such a brazen and public endorsement if it were untrue. If google does indeed reset permissions then you know they've at least been in contact.

If it were a smaller company I'd like to see proof.

> If it were a smaller company I'd like to see proof.

Amazing how much trust the mere size of a company ensues.

It's not size directly, but the risk of goodwill. A bigger company stands to lose more goodwill.

I disagree. I think the bigger the company, the more likely they less care about users/support/their image. They're 'too big to fall' and the sheep are already on the ship. I believe there's plenty of examples out there, I can give you two straight away [1], [2].

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5523992

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12034608

Google cares a lot about user privacy. If only a few percent of their users change their default search engine from Google to DuckDuckGo, they will loose a lot of revenue.

Well, seems like a few people are already looking around for an alternative [1] when it comes to privacy [2]. I can see some effort [3] but I'm not sure if addressing user's privacy concerns is their main goal.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12035667

[2] http://technical.ly/philly/2015/06/16/duckduckgo-cnbc

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12042613

I think it can also be size directly, the more people involved the more chance that one of them would tell-all.

That and stock value

The bigger the company, the higher the chances that a public statement - especially one admitting to a mistake - has to pass through PR and legal, and that one of those stops you from implicating a third party company in your actions if they aren't really being a part.

Too much to lose, not enough to gain.

It's probably much easier to involve Google when you are a Google spinoff company.

Yeah, because they likely have the phone number of someone they can call.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com