Live data from Hacker News

Google Critic Ousted from Think Tank Funded by the Tech Giant

nytimes.com

31–40 of 481 posts

Re: Google Critic Ousted from Think Tank Funded by the Tech Giant

#31

The thing is that Google has absolutely gone down questionable path from their early days. It is a little unfair to think this problem exists only within Google. Time and time again we are reminded why corporations will evolve to become as greedy and as protective of their turf expansive of their power and monopolistic as they can get, even if good people are running them. It is the system itself that does this, corp…

But others didn't start with "Do No Evil" motto (transformed now into "Do the Right Thing").

Re: Google Critic Ousted from Think Tank Funded by the Tech Giant

#32
post #9

It's early so not sure I'm reading this correctly, but it appears Google funded a group, then one of the members posted a statement applauding the recent 2.7 billion dollar fine against Google and that member was subsequently removed from the group? Well duh! Criticize Google all you like. But does anyone really think companies have an obligation to fund their critics? Or that groups receiving such funding have an ob…

The article wasn't suggesting that Google has to fund its critics. The article was describing how a theoretically independent think-tank was compromised by Google. First Google offers you money for the work you're already doing. Once you become dependent on that money, they can threaten to take it away. The problem is that the only way to be truly independent is to take no money from corporations. But any group that…

Have I awoken in an alternate universe?

Once 21 million dollars was accepted there isn't an "independence" theoretical or otherwise. It's ludicrous to existentially attack the company giving this money and expect not be removed from the group.

If you want true independence it has to be something like citizen grass roots funding. And even that probably has a bias. But it would be a start. Expecting anything but special interest once corporate money is involved just is unrealistic.

Re: Google Critic Ousted from Think Tank Funded by the Tech Giant

#33
Personally, I'm glad Google is behaving this way: it is tiring to tell people over and over again that one should not put absolute trust into any company and be met with bewilderment and references to the "Don't be evil" motto ( the one that they finally got rid of).

Re: Google Critic Ousted from Think Tank Funded by the Tech Giant

#34
post #31

The thing is that Google has absolutely gone down questionable path from their early days. It is a little unfair to think this problem exists only within Google. Time and time again we are reminded why corporations will evolve to become as greedy and as protective of their turf expansive of their power and monopolistic as they can get, even if good people are running them. It is the system itself that does this, corp…

But others didn't start with "Do No Evil" motto (transformed now into "Do the Right Thing").

It really should say: "Lay with the dogs, wake up with the fleas"

Re: Google Critic Ousted from Think Tank Funded by the Tech Giant

#35

I'm not normally a grammar pedant, but i had to reread the first two opening paragraphs several times before I understood what was going on: > The New America Foundation has received more than $21 million from Google; its parent company’s executive chairman, Eric Schmidt; and his family’s foundation since the think tank’s founding in 1999. Semicolons aren't glorified commas. Stop it. Bad! Bad! :-p

Semicolons are valid (especially) when the list items themselves contain commas - such as "its parent company's executive chairman, Eric Schmidt".

Re: Google Critic Ousted from Think Tank Funded by the Tech Giant

#37
post #31

The thing is that Google has absolutely gone down questionable path from their early days. It is a little unfair to think this problem exists only within Google. Time and time again we are reminded why corporations will evolve to become as greedy and as protective of their turf expansive of their power and monopolistic as they can get, even if good people are running them. It is the system itself that does this, corp…

But others didn't start with "Do No Evil" motto (transformed now into "Do the Right Thing").

Google's motto was never "do no evil". Previously, it was "don't be evil".

Re: Google Critic Ousted from Think Tank Funded by the Tech Giant

#38
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But others didn't start with "Do No Evil" motto (transformed now into "Do the Right Thing").

It really should say: "Lay with the dogs, wake up with the fleas"

To be fair, it doesn't say for whom it is the right thing.

Re: Google Critic Ousted from Think Tank Funded by the Tech Giant

#39
I just spent the better part of a week getting myself off of GMail. I'm still using Chrome at work for development, but have Brave browser for personal use now. I'm using DuckDuckGo for searches. I have an iPhone, but honestly, I don't trust Apple to not act like total dumbasses and so I am now lamenting the consolidation in the smart phone space.

Google and these other companies are blowing themselves up over idiotic politics. It may be a trickle today, but it doesn't take much for a trickle to become a raging river of people migrating off your ecosystem. Are you listening Google? Or are you so tone deaf and smug that you can't hear anymore?

Maybe it's time anyways--Google and Facebook are so lame. They are so anathema to what the original Internet was all about. Hint: It's about humanity and open access to ideas, not closed plantations with no diversity of thought allowed.

Re: Google Critic Ousted from Think Tank Funded by the Tech Giant

#40

The thing is that Google has absolutely gone down questionable path from their early days. It is a little unfair to think this problem exists only within Google. Time and time again we are reminded why corporations will evolve to become as greedy and as protective of their turf expansive of their power and monopolistic as they can get, even if good people are running them. It is the system itself that does this, corp…

The thing is, these sort of situations (creating dependence) are very hard to pick apart and point out who is at fault.

Say an organization 'A' funds another organization 'B' (maybe non-profit, maybe not), and over time 'B' becomes very dependent on the donations they are getting from 'A'. Then say they start to have a conflict of interest, and 'A' drops funding(which probably kills 'B').

Who's the bad guy here? How should've 'B' known there might be a conflict of interest in the future if not immediately?

Post reply on HN