←back to thread

418 points thepuppet33r | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.24s | source
Show context
thepuppet33r ◴[] No.42175024[source]
Yes, Google deserves to be distrusted and avoided as a whole, but Google Scholar is a genuinely net good for humanity.
replies(3): >>42175704 #>>42180078 #>>42181021 #
dumpHero2 ◴[] No.42175704[source]
I have similar feeing for Gmail (it's effective anti spam engine), google maps and google docs (which pioneered shared docs. It feels outdated on many fronts now, but it was a pioneer).
replies(8): >>42175773 #>>42175878 #>>42176170 #>>42177151 #>>42177404 #>>42179179 #>>42186118 #>>42187586 #
globular-toast ◴[] No.42177151[source]
Google maps would only be a net good if the data was available under a free licence. As it is they take data from people that should have gone to a public project like OpenStreetMap.
replies(2): >>42177478 #>>42178530 #
arccy ◴[] No.42177478[source]
"take", these people would never have produced any data if gmaps wasn't there...
replies(1): >>42177599 #
hatthew ◴[] No.42177599[source]
At one point I contributed quite a bit to google maps, because it was the primary map system I was using at the time. Had I been using an OSM-based system, I would have made contributions there instead.
replies(1): >>42177773 #
1. arccy ◴[] No.42177773[source]
indeed, osm can't paint itself like a victim, it needs good end products to bring in contributors.