Live data from Hacker News

Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

publicpolicy.googleblog.com

71–80 of 260 posts

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#71
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of the very many terrible things in these trade treaties (most notably the massive expansions of copyright and patents), this is one of the few that seems helpful. It's a step towards not having to care (as much) about national borders on the Internet. A company providing a service accessible to the entire Internet should not have to worry about jurisdictions other than their own.

To offer an alternative viewpoint. In Canada we have laws that protect personal health data. For instance my doctor cannot save my patient data outside of the country. This is a major pain for SAAS vendors, and I understand google's position. However, as a patient I appreciate knowing that my personal health data is not being sent around the world to other jurisdictions that may not have the same privacy and data pro…

I agree with this as an American as well. Obviously worries about the NSA getting your data are moot if the data was American to begin with, but there are a lot of other concerns, too. I wouldn't feel comfortable with my medical data being stored just anywhere, and I think it's entirely reasonable that the U.S. government should be able to put some restrictions on where it's stored.

It may be possible to come up with a list of reasonably similar and friendly countries where such restrictions are dropped, because they agree to similar protections, and form a kind of common data-storage zone. For example, I am probably okay with reputable Canadian or German companies being contracted to store sensitive data. We could have a treaty formalizing what that zone is and what common protections will be applied. But the TPP is not by any reasonable stretch of the imagination that zone. The TPP includes countries where being homosexual is a serious crime, for example. Is it really wise for the U.S. government to agree to be bound by treaty not to take measures to keep its citizens' medical data, student records, employment records, etc. out of those countries' hands?

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#72
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TPP binds governments from requiring local data storage, not private contracts.

Thank you for clarifying. The argumentation still stands though.

Not really, there's a big difference between state enforced rules about where data can be and client requested rules.

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#73
post #70
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To offer an alternative viewpoint. In Canada we have laws that protect personal health data. For instance my doctor cannot save my patient data outside of the country. This is a major pain for SAAS vendors, and I understand google's position. However, as a patient I appreciate knowing that my personal health data is not being sent around the world to other jurisdictions that may not have the same privacy and data pro…

> However, as a patient I appreciate knowing that my personal health data is not being sent around the world to other jurisdictions that may not have the same privacy and data protection laws that we do here. Having your bits stored on Canadian soil doesn't magically make them secure. The emphasis should be on security, not physical location.

[deleted]

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#74

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…

I don't really know, but I'm guessing it's a comprehensive deal. With tons of players with their own goals. So there's probably plenty of stuff like "your eggs aren't round enough to be labelled like that, but we'll allow them if we can call our meat like this". And "we don't like your copyright law, but in exchange for ... we'll allow it". Layer on exceptions and whatever else and the page count goes up real quick.…

I would be okay with minutia or details like these, making it a highly complex trade agreement. What i can never swallow is the secrecy. If it really is a good trade deal, why not make it transparent? They should be publishing it online, searchable and indexable with consice summaries for every section. This deal will literally affect billions of people, the people have a right to know.

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#75

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 Bill of Rights is really short and simple, but there have been millions of pages of legal precedent discussing and defining it ever since it was enacted. If you made TPP a concise document with 5-10 specific objectives they would all be litigated for decades to decide on the very same special cases that are detailed in the 2,000 page agreement.

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#76
Speaking of Google and politics, Julian Assange claims that Google has made a deal with Hillary Clinton and is backing her [0]. That's not far-fetched considering how intertwined Google and White House are. The Intercept has a really detailed analysis and a chart showing how Google and WH share so many lobbyists and executives [1]. Google wants to keep Democrats in the White House so they can continue their influence over various decisions and FTC (which squashed the investigation into Google's anticompetitive practices).

And just today, Google was accused of whitewashing Hillary Clinton's record and not showing negative autocomplete terms [2].

Google's "don't be evil" mantra is just a way to inoculate themselves from criticism. If anyone accuses them of anything unethical or evil or inappropriate, they can always claim how they are "not doing anything evil" because that's their policy. It becomes circular logic.

Assange has exposed Google's close ties to the State Department in the past as well. For example, give this NY Times article a read [3]. If you want to see how deep the rabbit hole goes, Assange also published a book about his meeting with Eric Schmidt and Jared Cohen of Google [4] and he published the complete transcript of their meeting. He also covered how Jared Cohen, formerly a State Department employee, was involved in regime changes around the world while at Google.

Assange also states that in 2015 former Google CEO Eric Schmidt launched “The Groundwork,” a startup specifically designed to get Clinton elected. [5]

Finally, Clinton's email release also confirmed that Google was involved in helping Syrian rebels who were trying to bring down the Syrian regime [6].

[0] http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/google-wor...

[1] https://theintercept.com/2016/04/22/googles-remarkably-close...

[2] http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-google-search-vi...

[3] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/opinion/sunday/the-banalit...

[4] https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems/

[5] http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/09/julian-assange-google-is-i...

[6] http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/new...

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#77
post #70
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To offer an alternative viewpoint. In Canada we have laws that protect personal health data. For instance my doctor cannot save my patient data outside of the country. This is a major pain for SAAS vendors, and I understand google's position. However, as a patient I appreciate knowing that my personal health data is not being sent around the world to other jurisdictions that may not have the same privacy and data pro…

> However, as a patient I appreciate knowing that my personal health data is not being sent around the world to other jurisdictions that may not have the same privacy and data protection laws that we do here. Having your bits stored on Canadian soil doesn't magically make them secure. The emphasis should be on security, not physical location.

False dichotomy. I would like my data stored securely AND not governed by the laws of some foreign regime in which I have no say in the future.

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#78
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DuckDuckGo is pretty fantastic all around. 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.

DuckDuckGo it is then. Bing is still Microsoft's product, so thats a bummer.

DuckDuckGo's killer feature is its thousands of !bang search shortcuts. They integrate with content sites' own search forms, so the results are similar to but often better than Google's site:example.com searches because the sites' have more domain knowledge over their content.

https://duckduckgo.com/bang

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also interesting: All current Presidential candidates have come out against the TPP. Presumably Obama is pressuring Google to help him push it through before he no longer has a say in the matter. If he can get it through, it's going to be very hard to repeal, but if he doesn't get it through, our next President, whoever that is, will do their best to block it.

Why do you assume the next president won't do a backflip and support it once they're in? Politicians break promises, and break opinions a whole lot more.

I can't argue that as a definite possibility. Obama certainly did quite a few things directly opposed to reasons I voted for him.

Re: Google endorses the Trans-Pacific Partnership

#80
post #21

This endorsement surprises me just because the TPP is so blatantly anti-consumer, pro-corporation. 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 the…

Is it anti-consumer? Convince me. I'm open. But I also want you to include counter-arguments. I want to hear both sides to reach a conclusion. So far most anti-TPP arguments I've read are high on rhetoric and low on substance.

That's because we don't know enough about the actual text to make a substantial argument. All we have are leaked drafts. And by the time the documents are finalized, it will be signed before the ink of the text is dry.

Do you know how many consumer advocacy groups are included in the negotiation process for TPP? I gather it's zero. Given the process is specifically intended to keep out consumers, why should we believe the end result will be any different?

Post reply on HN