231–240 of 315 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They would still send your data to the government when there is a subpoena I suppose
If they didn't comply with subpoenas, people would be complaining that Google thought it was above the law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am so saddened by how much we trust Google. I wish we regarded Google software with more suspicion. Would people have been nearly as upset if it had been Google that acquired GitHub? I miss the days of being suspicious of Microsoft. But Microsoft isn't nearly as diabolical as Google, nor are they as competent.
I'd argue MS has become less diabolical as they've become more competent (VS Code, e.g.). Google is more complex, they are certainly looking more diabolical, not quite sure about the more competent - I suppose it only matters that they are competent enough to be dangerous.
1) Uploads data from their user's computer to their servers.
2) Operates a search engine and Ad business with user tracking and data mining
3) Owns linked In and actively mines their user's data and shares it with advertisers
4) An investor and partner with Facebook.
5) Operates data centers in China that are run by state run companies that funnel user data back to the government.
I guess we’ll get a new blog post from Pichai about the people he fired because tracking users against their wishes, exposing data against their wishes, and compelling employees to delete their own files “contrary to our basic values and our Code of Conduct.” [0] Fortunately Google is an ethical company and not hypocritical when it comes to very important issues. Maybe this will be positive and result in new US law l…
Reminds me of this tweet: https://twitter.com/nmgrm/status/1038790691529273345 >programmers get upset about the words “master/slave” in software now, but are happy to keep constructing a global surveillance economy and becoming middle caste
Ouch. It must be really fun for Googlers to hear their company is working so hard to repress dissidents trying to reveal its secret project to help China repress dissidents.
Fact of the matter is that there is a Chinese internet and a US internet. Going forward there will be a Chinese internet, that some authoritarian countries will adopt that are a part of the Chinese sphere of influence. American companies, and the American government through them want a foothold on that internet. This is the only way for them to do so. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/20/eric-schmidt-ex-google-ceo-p...
Sure, that's today. But you'd be crazy if you thought the CPC would be around forever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Google is selling out for nothing. I don't understand the notion. Google already censors anything they like with very advanced methods that even provide them with plausible deniability, high specificity etc. And I bet they're better than the Chinese at tracking literally everything you do online and connecting that with your real, offline identity, complete with your entire social network graph, your biometrics, SSN…
Censorship is a government action. When people and private companies do it, it's called filtering. There's a world of difference between an individual or company having control over data vs. a government. People and companies with heavy influence can mess things up a quite a bit, sure, but they can't arrest, imprison, sentence or put anyone to death.
>Emails demanding deletion of the memo contained “pixel trackers” that notified human resource managers when their messages had been read, recipients determined. This seems like the worst part (not that the rest is not bad), anyone has an idea of what this "pixel trackers" are and how they actually work?
> This seems like the worst part (not that the rest is not bad), anyone has an idea of what this "pixel trackers" are and how they actually work? This is very old tech. "Invisible" image linked to a url. Pretty much every ad email has pixel trackers for data ( impressions, etc ). It's used heavily in marketing. Not sure why google would use such primitive tech. There are better ways to verify that an message has been…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, they will never be as huge as local companies, but what's the downside to trying? Google being there doesn't make chinese access to internet any worse. If anything, their government would have to pump in more money into the local companies to stop Google from gaining a foothold, which would be a positive for their citizens.
The downside to trying is being knowingly complicit in human rights abuse lol
Ask yourself, are we complicit in human rights abuse? We all pay our taxes right? Where do our taxes go? Dictators propped up globally. How many dissidents were tortured and executed with the aid of our intelligence agencies? What about the ongoing Israeli human rights abuses -- illegal occupation and genocide are somehow less than important than Chinese speech moderation?
We are so inconsistent. If we actually care about progress then we wouldn't get distracted by each instance of a problem. These posts, our comments... they are us trying to make ourselves feel better by spinning lies. Attack the underlying problems. Our problems are social problems, legal problems.
Advocate. Spread awareness. Run for office. Volunteer. Tackle the problem.
All this outrage about about Google wanting to censor search in China is even less productive than men being angry at women having abortions. At least with abortions, men can claim to speak for the fetus. Even if Google expands makes a censored search engine for China, at worst it maintains the status quo. I'm sure you could come up with a philosophical argument to why it's bad, but it definitely has no weight over m…
I agree so much. How about we hear from some Chinese people about how they feel about the developments? The few comments I've seen have expressed excitement and highlighted the extreme issues with Baidu. The outrage seems to be coming entirely from people with no real stake in this news. I absolutely believe there's a discussion worth having about the extent capitulating to authoritarian demands is morally and practi…
But I realized as long as my perspective didn't fit the narrative of Western media or general view by westerners, it gets downvoted (just like comments in this trend).
I understand that HN allows downvotes for disagreeing, and I think that causes self-censorship. But as an individual concerned about the amount of karma, I just choose to self-censor myself.
Ouch. It must be really fun for Googlers to hear their company is working so hard to repress dissidents trying to reveal its secret project to help China repress dissidents.
Fact of the matter is that there is a Chinese internet and a US internet. Going forward there will be a Chinese internet, that some authoritarian countries will adopt that are a part of the Chinese sphere of influence. American companies, and the American government through them want a foothold on that internet. This is the only way for them to do so. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/20/eric-schmidt-ex-google-ceo-p...
Well, that may supply an alternative to those barred from the US internet, cf. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18043141
It would be fun to watch that develop.