Live data from Hacker News

Google Needs to Come Clean About Its Chinese Plans

eff.org

111–120 of 147 posts

Re: Google Needs to Come Clean About Its Chinese Plans

#111

Why does Google anymore need to come clean than any other American business that does business with China?

Because a future Google that is susceptible to blackmail by the CCP is dangerous in a way that most other companies just can't be.

Gap, at worst, can be ordered to change their t-shirt designs[1]. But nobody considers crappy t-shirts a source of truth, unlike Google Maps or Google Search. What if (when) China asks Google to apply censorship outside of China in order to stay in the Chinese market?

[1] https://money.cnn.com/2018/05/15/news/companies/gap-tshirt-m...

Re: Google Needs to Come Clean About Its Chinese Plans

#112
post #86
post #23

Why? It’s not like they’re using slave labor. Google will reveal their plans if and when it suits them.

Some people believe we have to apply the same Western, liberal standard to all nations of the Earth.

That would imply that there actually IS such a thing. The West is not a monoculture. The political and cultural differences between the Netherlands and the US are as vast as the cultural and political differences between the US and China.

Re: Google Needs to Come Clean About Its Chinese Plans

#113
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It will not affect Google's offerings outside of China. But while inside their walls, you got to follow their rules. No. Having operations in China gives the Chinese government leverage over you, which they're starting to use to pressure companies to toe their line even outside of the PRC. For examples, see the recent articles regarding airline's treatment of Taiwan on their websites [1]. See also how Mercedes-Benz…

Any company operating in China must necessarily welcome a new stakeholder to the table, which are the Chinese citizens, themselves. With that, Chinese citizens are on the whole proud nationalists. Flag waving, chest thumping Nationalists, proud of their country and protecting against any perceived or real slight. Sure, many of them are likely Party members, raised from birth. So, it seems hard to discern the line her…

In the case of airlines, it was the Chinese gov't directly. I would assume that they attempt to solve issues through "grassroots" complaints before officially stepping in.

But it doesn't really matter. The end result is the same, Google becomes more susceptible to blackmail.

Re: Google Needs to Come Clean About Its Chinese Plans

#114

It is simply not possible to both cooperate with the Chinese (or, to a lesser extent, any other) government against its citizens and remain transparent. Part of this type of cooperation includes a requirement by the government for opacity. This is easier for less-principled and/or more closed companies. You can only not-cooperate transparently (and even then, only sometimes). The real problem is you can't have a we'l…

> Just stop requiring growth at all costs, chalk up the China (and military) market as a loss, and continue operating at your massively profitable status quo. It could be that it's not just about profit or growth, but about preventing Chinese companies from developing competing technology.

How would this work? It seems more likely that Google’s collaboration could allow them access to technology that they will copy and iterate upon. This is what Japan did and they now exceed the US in several technological domains (e.g. automotive manufacturing).

Re: Google Needs to Come Clean About Its Chinese Plans

#115
post #11

Why are we going as far as China? Facebook, Google, Apple, Twitter, among others need to come clean about their censorship of conservative voices right here in their back yard. All the folks who rallied for net neutrality are now cheering for the coordinated Big Tech assault on free speech. This needs to be talked about. Agree or disagree with the voices they are silencing (ie. Alex Jones), what is happening these da…

It's no "assault on free speech". The right of free speech doesn't mean that private corporations have to be a platform for it. The right embraced private corporations having "religious and moral rights" with the cake shop and Hobby Lobby cases. This is the other side of the coin.

> The right of free speech doesn't mean that private corporations have to be a platform for it.

Free Speech is a principle that the First Amendment applies when restricting government. Private corporations that decide to be a platform for public speech (I think publicly accessible social media posts count) have to consider how they promote free speech. If, on the other hand, the private corporations want to exercise their freedom of association and take clear editorial positions, that's fine too. But, philosophically, they can't have it both ways.

Also note that Google, Facebook, and Apple seemed to have coordinated the ban. Both in size and in style, this is a different beast than Masterpiece.

Finally, Masterpiece was about being compelled to make specific cakes. Customers weren't banned from all cakes or anything. In that way it resembles demonetizing specific YouTube videos more than banning entire channels.

* I think it's fine to boot Alex Jones on the merits, for the record. Though the level of coordination among the BigCos here is concerning.

Re: Google Needs to Come Clean About Its Chinese Plans

#116
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It will not affect Google's offerings outside of China. But while inside their walls, you got to follow their rules. No. Having operations in China gives the Chinese government leverage over you, which they're starting to use to pressure companies to toe their line even outside of the PRC. For examples, see the recent articles regarding airline's treatment of Taiwan on their websites [1]. See also how Mercedes-Benz…

Any company operating in China must necessarily welcome a new stakeholder to the table, which are the Chinese citizens, themselves. With that, Chinese citizens are on the whole proud nationalists. Flag waving, chest thumping Nationalists, proud of their country and protecting against any perceived or real slight. Sure, many of them are likely Party members, raised from birth. So, it seems hard to discern the line her…

That does not at all alleviate the concerns about Google's presence in China affecting the business outside of China. How does that square with the "separate sets of rules" you mentioned earlier?

Re: Google Needs to Come Clean About Its Chinese Plans

#117

This disproportionate focus on China is being used as a distraction from the all encompassing surveillance currently run by the NSA, GCHQ and Google, Facebook and others which is a far bigger and ongoing threat to democracy and citizens here. China's actions are limited to China. There is hardly any activism against the invasive surveillance of SV companies or protests against the NSA. This forum itself has its fair…

> China's actions are limited to China

They're not, see the comment by ardy42.

> There is hardly any activism against the invasive surveillance of SV companies or protests against the NSA

There are plenty of encryption projects around here, and I would not describe the HN crowd as pro-NSA or even pro-Facebook.

Keeping Google insulated from the influence of the Chinese market seems at least somewhat realistic as an activism goal. Separating Google from the US gov't is simply impossible.

(EU citizen here, if that makes a difference.)

Re: Google Needs to Come Clean About Its Chinese Plans

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's no "assault on free speech". The right of free speech doesn't mean that private corporations have to be a platform for it. The right embraced private corporations having "religious and moral rights" with the cake shop and Hobby Lobby cases. This is the other side of the coin.

> The right of free speech doesn't mean that private corporations have to be a platform for it. Free Speech is a principle that the First Amendment applies when restricting government. Private corporations that decide to be a platform for public speech (I think publicly accessible social media posts count) have to consider how they promote free speech. If, on the other hand, the private corporations want to exercise…

Finally, Masterpiece was about being compelled to make specific cakes. Customers weren't banned from all cakes or anything. In that way it resembles demonetizing specific YoyTube videos more than banning entire channels.

YouTube hosts videos. Apple doesn’t host podcast. Apple didn’t feel “compelled” to scrape Alex Jones podcast.

Re: Google Needs to Come Clean About Its Chinese Plans

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Just stop requiring growth at all costs, chalk up the China (and military) market as a loss, and continue operating at your massively profitable status quo. It could be that it's not just about profit or growth, but about preventing Chinese companies from developing competing technology.

How would this work? It seems more likely that Google’s collaboration could allow them access to technology that they will copy and iterate upon. This is what Japan did and they now exceed the US in several technological domains (e.g. automotive manufacturing).

> How would this work?

By entering a market as a big player, you effectively steal money from the existing players. Also, you're increasing the barriers of entry for new players.

Re: Google Needs to Come Clean About Its Chinese Plans

#120
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It will not affect Google's offerings outside of China. But while inside their walls, you got to follow their rules. No. Having operations in China gives the Chinese government leverage over you, which they're starting to use to pressure companies to toe their line even outside of the PRC. For examples, see the recent articles regarding airline's treatment of Taiwan on their websites [1]. See also how Mercedes-Benz…

Any company operating in China must necessarily welcome a new stakeholder to the table, which are the Chinese citizens, themselves. With that, Chinese citizens are on the whole proud nationalists. Flag waving, chest thumping Nationalists, proud of their country and protecting against any perceived or real slight. Sure, many of them are likely Party members, raised from birth. So, it seems hard to discern the line her…

> So, it seems hard to discern the line here between it being an actual concerted government action against these companies vs. just simply a function of a gang of these loudly screaming nationalist citizens, connected through social media, calling out the companies.

There is also the 50 cent party.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/50_Cent_Party

Post reply on HN