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

471–480 of 481 posts

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

#471

Post by thejynxed »

wavefunction wrote: post #316
adventured wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bernie has/is changing that, but even then I would argue the main power structures haven't changed. Bernie isn't / hasn't changed anything and won't. Sanders comes at the problem from a position that is considered Socialist (even though he's only a Socialist in name for the headlines), which will keep him forever in a cordoned off box. The last force in US politics with any influence in that regard, was Ralph Nader…

Actually Bernie is a self-described Democratic Socialist to a certain extent, but he seems quite pragmatic rather than dogmatic.

Pragmatic enough that he bought a third home with all of that tasty donation money....

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

#472

Post by thejynxed »

jstandard wrote: post #460
Jerry2 wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out this story for example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15136918 It was censored by HN admins as a dupe.Even thought it's different from the other Google story about firing of a critic.

The content of that story and especially the HN discussion of that story was 95% similar to an already much larger and very active discussion on HN about the New York Times version of that story. In case you missed it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15131370 The WaPo article adds nothing materially new to a conversation about Open Markets and Barry Lynn's firing. Dozens of stories daily are marked as dupes to k…

Or if this site was written properly, the moderators could merge the two together and edit in a note as to why.

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

#473

Post by kuschku »

thejynxed wrote: post #469
kuschku wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to remember, though, that these aren’t small national governments. If Google really pissed off the EU, or US, they could simply force all banks to freeze Google’s assets, and seize them. This has worked in the past, and can be used again.

If the EU and US really pissed off Google, imagine the things that would start appearing in news centers all over the world that Google has stashed away on storage drives in some backroom server.

This might cause issues in many countries, but there’s equally many stories about Google that can quickly be on the front page of all German newspapers, and would cause a rioting mob to lynch Google’s developers.

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

#474

Post by root_axis »

rhizome wrote: post #467
root_axis wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a bad-faith reply to guelo, who was the one trying to tell us "how it really is." Please explain to me how the argument is made in bad faith. You're characterizing their comment in this way because you disagree with their statement, you even go so far as to speculate on a cynical internal thought stream regarding their motivations for posting. To me, it reads like they are making an earnest argument, even if the rh…

root_axis' reply is what I was calling bad faith: "Castigating someone else's opinions as the destruction of open discussion is the height of irony." This is putting words into kobeya's comment, which was about discourse, not discussion.

You wrote: "I agree, but that's in a bad-faith reply to guelo,". I'm confused as to how that's meant to refer to my comment when I never replied to guelo.

> This is putting words into kobeya's comment, which was about discourse, not discussion

I will admit I misquoted, but the words "discourse" and "discussion" have a nearly identical meaning in this context unless there is a definition of discourse I am not aware of. Can you explain what you mean?

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

#475

Post by root_axis »

guelo wrote: post #399
root_axis wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No, comments that are off-topic are noise. All you're doing here is begging the question. What i'm telling you is that the comment does not meet the definition of "off-topic" and I've explained my reasoning for that, all you've done is repeat the same sentiment that "off-topic comments are noise" which is a completely non-controversial statement that nobody is arguing against. Absent of any further reasoning I am l…

Honestly I'm very confused by this whole sub-thread because I can't tell if kobeya was talking about my comment or ex3xu's. In my opinion ex3xu's comment was completely off-topic from the original article, and that's what prompted me to respond to him.

I think he's definitely referring to your comment, he even mimicked your "the real evil is" phrasing. Either way, I don't think either of your comments (you or ex3xu) are off topic, they're both commentary that reflects on the events described in the article.

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

#476

Post by throwawaymanbot »

jgalt212 wrote: post #462
peteretep wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Its the market at work Sounds like an example of Market Failure

Agreed. It's institutionalized crony capitalism.

But theres nothing that can be stopped about Crony Capitalism unless govt bans lobbying. You can have capitalism, or you can have lobbying, but you cant have them both.

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

#477

Post by rhizome »

root_axis wrote: post #474
rhizome wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

root_axis' reply is what I was calling bad faith: "Castigating someone else's opinions as the destruction of open discussion is the height of irony." This is putting words into kobeya's comment, which was about discourse, not discussion.

You wrote: "I agree, but that's in a bad-faith reply to guelo,". I'm confused as to how that's meant to refer to my comment when I never replied to guelo. > This is putting words into kobeya's comment, which was about discourse, not discussion I will admit I misquoted, but the words "discourse" and "discussion" have a nearly identical meaning in this context unless there is a definition of discourse I am not aware of…

"platform for open discourse" would seem to support that, but this is all so far afield now that I can't muster much energy to continue the thread. I just hate it when people reply like they have the only window into reality. "let me correct you on how things really are."

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

#478

Post by tjr225 »

maaaats wrote: post #422
tjr225 wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have ditched google almost entirely. The only two google services I use are search (via duckduckgo bang encrypted searches) and maps. Honestly...OpenStreetMap and Apple Maps simply do not compare. It is very hard to not use Google Maps. I also use Waze but it is my understanding that the two are of the same. Even so, I prefer to use Google Maps.

Tried Here maps?

I will give it a shot.

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

#479

Post by vonnik »

forapurpose wrote: post #364
vonnik wrote: post #332

I don't find this very shocking or offensive. Pragmatic people don't bite the hand that feeds them. That means that every think tank will have at least one blind spot in the form of its major donor. This is also true of many media outlets. Bloomberg News is very careful when it reports about Michael Bloomberg. The same could be said of many other publications' relationship to their owners. If you don't like the peopl…

I don't find corruption (to a certain degree) shocking, but it is offensive and should be minimized and we should find ways to reduce it over time. Murder isn't shocking - it happens all the time - but absolutely should be minimized. Do you think it's not a story, that the NY Times shouldn't have published it?

It is a story. But it's a predictable drama, and the story is just as much about the researcher's naiveté as Google's inevitable reaction. A lot of outrage was circulating about this, and I'm incapable of sharing that outrage in this case.

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

#480

Post by owebmaster »

occultist_throw wrote: post #441
otakucode wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's weird in a larger historical sense, but in a contemporary sense not so much. The US has moved radically rightward since the 1980s, and that only got kicked into higher gear since 9/11/2001 once 'patriotism' or 'security' could be tapped any time to shut down critics. It's not just a difference of opinion when you can claim it's some sort of existential threat. From my perspective, it looks like we're in some res…

> Suggesting such a socialist solution back then would elicit discussion. Nothing of the sort can be discussed today. One whisper of the word 'socialism' is followed by 'communism' and all discussion is aggressively ended. Indeed. That's because the specter of "Communism", aka Dictatorship was the eventual downfall of Marx's idea of Capitalism->Violent Overthrow->Dictatorship->Stateless and Classless Communism. The p…

> I could see a Benefit Corp do something similar - taking the ideas of ownership and lock them in a public trust.

And a regular corp do something similar to "communist" dictatorships. Planified economies, highly specialization and a charismatic CEO as the ruler.

Post reply on HN