... but they can still discriminate. In some jurisdictions, such as the UK, intention or malice is not required. If Google has a policy or system that disadvantages a group of people who share a protected characteristic, it is discriminating. This is defined in law.
Notice how that article uses the term "indirect discrimination", rather than just "discrimination"? That qualifier is there because without it, most people understand "discrimination" to mean intentional prejudice.
... but they can still discriminate. In some jurisdictions, such as the UK, intention or malice is not required. If Google has a policy or system that disadvantages a group of people who share a protected characteristic, it is discriminating. This is defined in law.
http://www.equality-law.co.uk/news/106/66/Types-of-discrimin...