21–30 of 260 posts
I'm under no illusion that Google's anything other massive tech-savvy advertising company, but the self-serving corporate side of the company is usually hidden behind the pretty veneer of "tech for the people". Supporting a trade agreement like the TPP (especially given the lack of transparency in the process) lacks their usual subtlety.
If they are so proud, surely a banner on Google is appropriate. It's for a good cause after all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, but Google often does the things it knows people aren't going to like behind closed doors. (For instance, Google's control over Android is done via confidential agreements. The public hasn't seen a version of these agreements newer than 2011.) An open, public endorsement of something that most tech enthusiasts who use their products know is a bad thing, is a very surprising move. I'm pretty sure I've seen a numbe…
>most everyone who uses their products knows is a bad thing I very much doubt most of their users could even tell you what it stood for, let alone have an opinion on its value.
I support TPP for geopolitical reasons, I am sure the Elites in the corridors of Power in Google do it for "access" and ability to sue the shit out of the gubmints that come in their way.
What are your geopolitical reasons?
At a fundamental level, US defining and guiding the world economic order as it has done with Bretton woods.
What are some alternatives to google search. I think I can get away from the rest of their products in the coming few months.
Bing is alright, to be honest (some of their data widgets are more comprehensive than Google's), but you will find times with Bing that you are sad with the results.
The free flow of information must be why they released this tidbit on Friday afternoon? If they are so proud, surely a banner on Google is appropriate. It's for a good cause after all.
I thought it was a very enjoyable way to learn about the agreement and why one might oppose it.
If these benefits are legitimate, why can't they focus on 5 or 10 specific objectives, and write them in some concise form like the Bill of Rights? Why does it need to be 2,000 pages and full of complex, obsfucated concepts and details? Is the only way for progress to happen? And even if the TPP is completely beneficial, it is still part of the philosophy of economic integration. Which at its heart is promoting the c…
If these benefits are legitimate, why can't they focus on 5 or 10 specific objectives, and write them in some concise form like the Bill of Rights? Why does it need to be 2,000 pages and full of complex, obsfucated concepts and details? Is the only way for progress to happen? And even if the TPP is completely beneficial, it is still part of the philosophy of economic integration. Which at its heart is promoting the c…
The cynic in me says thinks of the TPP as a gigantic pile of economic concessions to specific corporate interests.
The more generous interpretation is that free trade creates winners and losers, but there's generally more winners than losers. The length of the agreement is then the result of multilateral negotiations. Each party realizes - in excruciating detail - how they're getting screwed, and attempts to negotiate concessions for agreeing to the entire thing.