Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Critic Ousted from Think Tank Funded by the Tech Giant

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 481 posts

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

#431

Post by epipping »

DrScump wrote: post #387
hgsigala wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If folks want to join the movement the staff is building, you can get involved here: https://citizensagainstmonopoly.org/ If you want to do more than that, here is some more information on the staff, story and other action items: https://goo.gl/9a7KkC

Using URL shorteners here in general is inappropriate. Choosing to use Google's URL shortener in this context is beyond ironic.

The target of the link is actually something hosted on Google Docs as http://checkshorturl.com/expand.php?u=https://goo.gl/9a7KkC will tell you so in this particular case it does not make a difference.

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

#432

Post by micael_dias »

jondubois wrote: post #426
redm wrote: post #93

The key point of the article is this: “Google is very aggressive in throwing its money around Washington and Brussels, and then pulling the strings,” Mr. Lynn said. “People are so afraid of Google now.” Honestly, the only thing shocking about any of this is that people thought Google was "special". The reality is, when its revenues are threatened, it's going to reach like any other corporation, which it should. Googl…

I like most Google products but I think that Gmail is the wost email client that was ever created. The default way in which it groups emails is terrible: 1. They have three tabs for emails, so to check if I have any new emails, I literally have to click through 3 different tabs. 2. When I have long email threads, new emails get lost under the clutter instead of showing up at the top of my inbox like a rational human…

I don't like Gmail either. But inbox.google.com is awesome.

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

#433

Post by afsina »

belorn wrote: post #372
afsina wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That term is an oxymoron.

This will just end up being a discussion about definitions, but lets dip into it. We can define a socialism government to be one that have the goal of having social ownership and democratic control of the means of production. We can define a free market to be one in which the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government, price-setting monopoly, or other authority. Thus a Free Ma…

Free markets allow monopolies. Actually it is the dream of all producers, but in practice they cannot live long. Reason there are monopolies or very high barriers to enter some industries is the state granted rights (eg. IP rights), regulations and restrictions.

Also you are avoiding the actual "social" side of the Socialism. In Socialism, there is always a forced redistribution mechanism in the name of "exploitation of the labor class". Which makes the "free market" impossible.

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

#434

Post by kruczek »

visarga wrote: post #315
freehunter wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you actually locked into those services? I decided to switch away from Google when they mixed up my inbox with someone else's and started sending my email to someone who quickly used the mistake to issue password resets on many of my accounts, and it was easier than I thought. With Gmail, I just forward my mail to my Outlook.com account, and I switched my email address on as many sites as I could to use my Outloo…

> The only Google service I use regularly is Google Translate, because there really is no comparison. There is one, since yesterday. Try https://www.deepl.com/translator

Impressive. I tried it on a couple comments in the thread as well as paragraphs from news sources, translating EnglishPolish and back, and it indeed produces much more readable (I might even say: natural) translations, than Google Translate.

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

#435

Post by belorn »

afsina wrote: post #433
belorn wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This will just end up being a discussion about definitions, but lets dip into it. We can define a socialism government to be one that have the goal of having social ownership and democratic control of the means of production. We can define a free market to be one in which the laws and forces of supply and demand are free from any intervention by a government, price-setting monopoly, or other authority. Thus a Free Ma…

Free markets allow monopolies. Actually it is the dream of all producers, but in practice they cannot live long. Reason there are monopolies or very high barriers to enter some industries is the state granted rights (eg. IP rights), regulations and restrictions. Also you are avoiding the actual "social" side of the Socialism. In Socialism, there is always a forced redistribution mechanism in the name of "exploitation…

monopolies and a free market is a oxymoron because at that point the monopoly has become a authority that intervene in the forces of supply and demand. Such authority can exist without government, and given enough capital and positioning it can be very stable. In history we can find examples of companies that through pure size and weight can solely influence the forces of supply and demand, with no need to get help from governments.

The state can naturally also create monopolies. patents are explicit in this, granting an entity a "limited" timed monopoly.

> there is always a forced redistribution mechanism

And now we enter the definition of terms. Forced redistribution is mechanism, not a goal in itself. Historically there have been governments that have tried it, through to be honest there hasn't been a country that have not had events of forced redistribution, and if the book Debt - The First 5,000 Years is correct in the historical data, the elimination of debt through violence was a recurring event that happened in all cultures. Forced redistribution happens all the time in history when the ability to repay get too impossible low compared to the amount of money being owned.

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

#436

Post by perlpimp »

cromwellian wrote: post #428
TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People in the comments seem to focus a lot on google itself, but this is the way the game is played. Just because something is commonly done does not mean that behavior is right. A reason this post is so popular is because people are becoming increasingly aware of the power & capital concentration occurring in this country. Google has for years successfully gave an image of a company capable of rising above the typ…

The world isn't black and white. The fact that large companies have to engage in lobbying because they are either threatened into it by unscrupulous politicians, or they are attacked by their competition by using the state for regulatory capture, doesn't make them all the same. The problem that technolibertarians/utopians have long had was that they imagined cyberspace as a completely separate dimension, that would n…

You mean legalized racket. When companies compete on basis who pays for the protection racket or extortion racket. This seems criminal.It is legal only because government personnel providers levers on informal individual basis.

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

#437

Post by afsina »

belorn wrote: post #435
afsina wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free markets allow monopolies. Actually it is the dream of all producers, but in practice they cannot live long. Reason there are monopolies or very high barriers to enter some industries is the state granted rights (eg. IP rights), regulations and restrictions. Also you are avoiding the actual "social" side of the Socialism. In Socialism, there is always a forced redistribution mechanism in the name of "exploitation…

monopolies and a free market is a oxymoron because at that point the monopoly has become a authority that intervene in the forces of supply and demand. Such authority can exist without government, and given enough capital and positioning it can be very stable. In history we can find examples of companies that through pure size and weight can solely influence the forces of supply and demand, with no need to get help f…

No, What I said is, monopolies can exist for a short time in a free-market system. But they live much longer in state controlled-restricted markets. And I doubt there is any example in History a real monopoly lived as long as patent expiration time (no, Standard oil was not a monopoly.) even in a "mostly" free market economy. Examine the Phoebus cartel for an example. Patents are indefensible in my eyes after witnessing the damage it gave to the development of human kind (pharmaceuticals, tech, software etc.). Besides, IP rights is only one of state's monopoly generation tools.

Perhaps my wording was not correct. What I mean by "forced redistribution" is getting money from producers by force (via taxation) and distributing it to a arbitrarily selected people. This is required in all forms of Socialism and it violates the rules of free market (capitalism).

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

#438

Post by humanrebar »

intended wrote: post #418
cromwellian wrote: post #395

I think Google's lobbying overall is the result of being punished early on by regulatory capture of competitors. Look at the threats: * Microsoft funded number backroom whisper campaigns in DC ( http://www.businessinsider.com/what-an-anti-google-whisper-c... ) * Microsoft and Oracle funded their own Astroturf lobbying groups and think tanks, to tie up the company in lawsuits and investigations (e.g. FairSearch) * Ora…

This is the key reason. Its the market at work - at some point the marginal advantage of investing even a little in lobbying results in more X, (where X can be anything from power to profit). And in a competitive scenario, SOMEONE will do it. Not to mention Even a unhappy incumbent can initiate a lobbying strategy. People in the comments seem to focus a lot on google itself, but this is the way the game is played. It…

> Its the market at work

It's economics, sure. I don't know what qualifies as a "market" here, though. There aren't standard shares of "lobbying" that people buy and sell.

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

#439

Post by brepl »

eridius wrote: post #370
visarga wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only Google service I use regularly is Google Translate, because there really is no comparison. There is one, since yesterday. Try https://www.deepl.com/translator

Unfortunately that appears to only support western European languages.

It only supports _some_ western European languages.

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

#440

Post by humanrebar »

gthtjtkt wrote: post #96
ebola1717 wrote: post #4

> “We are in the process of trying to expand our relationship with Google on some absolutely key points,” Ms. Slaughter wrote in an email to Mr. Lynn, urging him to “just THINK about how you are imperiling funding for others.” That was a real kicker for me. This seems like pretty blatant corporate censorship. Unfortunately, it's hard to make the public care about a situation like this that's so out of view.

Yeah, she's talking out both sides of her mouth. First, she says his work is imperiling their funding (referring to Google's complaint about its positions not being represented). Then, she says his work has nothing to do with his firing.

It sounds like, "I think this person is good at their job. Unfortunately we can't afford to have someone else with these views in our organization. I would recommend another organization hire this person."
Post reply on HN