Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl to Technology@lemmy.ml · 1 year agoWired has retracted its article "How Google alters search queries"www.wired.comexternal-linkmessage-square97fedilinkarrow-up1388arrow-down15file-textcross-posted to: quarks@startrek.websitetechnology@lemmy.worldnews@lemmy.worldtechnology@beehaw.orggoogle@lemdro.idtechnology@lemmy.worldtechnology@lemmy.worldstallmanwasright@lemmy.mltechnology@lemmy.ml
arrow-up1383arrow-down1external-linkWired has retracted its article "How Google alters search queries"www.wired.comSkull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl to Technology@lemmy.ml · 1 year agomessage-square97fedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: quarks@startrek.websitetechnology@lemmy.worldnews@lemmy.worldtechnology@beehaw.orggoogle@lemdro.idtechnology@lemmy.worldtechnology@lemmy.worldstallmanwasright@lemmy.mltechnology@lemmy.ml
minus-squareChunk@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·1 year agoIf I understand correctly the article is a lie. The author “misunderstood” what they were reading.
minus-squareSkull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nlOPlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 year agoIn that case Google wouldn’t “threaten the hell out of the employee”, they’d send a cease and desist to Wired, the company. Which, given that these documents are apparently considered confidential by the court, would make a lot more sense.
If I understand correctly the article is a lie. The author “misunderstood” what they were reading.
In that case Google wouldn’t “threaten the hell out of the employee”, they’d send a cease and desist to Wired, the company. Which, given that these documents are apparently considered confidential by the court, would make a lot more sense.