Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company • Hacker News Board

Re: Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

#41

Post by jamiequint » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 6:44 PM UTC

IBM wrote: post #6

Brian Acton or anyone else feeling guilty about their ad-tech wealth: use your winnings to lobby for a federal privacy bill that is as strong and comprehensive as GDPR (and other EU privacy regulations). The industry is moving to enact something that maintains the status quo [1]. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/26/technology/tech-industry-...

Ironically, in a way similar to most legislation, GDPR will mostly benefit the largest tech companies at the expense of small startups that may eventually compete with them. Google, FB, et al have endless amounts of resources to comply with and litigate legislation like GDPR, whereas it's a substantial cost to smaller companies to do the same.

Re: Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

#42

Post by tensor » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 6:44 PM UTC

gunnihinn wrote: post #28

bilbo0s wrote: post #7

I actually applaud Poulson for leaving Google in protest of Google's Chinese business practices. Having mentioned that, I think I have to part ways with him when he implies that the correct way to "fix" this is to have the government come in and make these sorts of business decisions for the company. I don't believe in the government obliging businesses to do things. Especially when it looks like this whole thing is…

> Once government gets involved and starts playing favorites, everything gets messed up. OK. Is it more or less messed up than that a private corporation can and is willing to perform surveillance on foreign citizens on behalf of those citizens' government that would be unacceptable anywhere else?

A company complying with the laws of the country it does business in seems fairly uncontroversial to me, even if you may not agree with those laws.

Do you want your companies to be extensions of US foreign policy?

Re: Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

#43

Post by vkou » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 6:44 PM UTC

kodablah wrote: post #26

IBM wrote: post #6

Brian Acton or anyone else feeling guilty about their ad-tech wealth: use your winnings to lobby for a federal privacy bill that is as strong and comprehensive as GDPR (and other EU privacy regulations). The industry is moving to enact something that maintains the status quo [1]. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/26/technology/tech-industry-...

Or don't use your winnings for lobbying for new laws heaped on everyone. Instead, use them to build what you consider the ideal, give grants to promote your principles, finance populace-educating groups, fund pro-privacy thinktanks/projects/foundations, etc. Please don't waste money or time on heavy-handed government internet intervention.

There are fifty million reasons for why 'Just build a better competing product' may be a less successful solution to this problem.

Re: Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

#44

Post by aqme28 » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 6:45 PM UTC

bilbo0s wrote: post #7

I actually applaud Poulson for leaving Google in protest of Google's Chinese business practices. Having mentioned that, I think I have to part ways with him when he implies that the correct way to "fix" this is to have the government come in and make these sorts of business decisions for the company. I don't believe in the government obliging businesses to do things. Especially when it looks like this whole thing is…

So what would you propose?

Re: Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

#45

Post by stale2002 » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 6:45 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #23

luminiferous wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously, growing every quarter significantly is not sustainable. But growing profits every quarter is how stock price goes up, right? Assuming you don't pay dividends on your stock, if you don't grow profits every quarter then your stock price doesn't go up, and the shareholders (via the board of directors) will sack the CEO. The whole incentive structure for corporations seems to cause the short term thinking that…

You still need to grow by more than the dividend or you will erode share price over time. Nobody invests $100 into a company so that a year from now it is $100, even if they get a couple $2.50 checks throughout the year on top of that.

> You still need to grow by more than the dividend or you will erode share price over time

No you don't.

Imagine a company that has a share price of 100$. And this company makes 10$ in profit, per share, and returns that 10$ in profits to shareholders every year in perpetuity.

Thats a 10% rate of return that investors would be happy to accept in perpetuity.

People accept this deal all the time. Usually they are called "bonds" or "loans", and they act as merely an a perpetuity cash payout.

Re: Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

#46

Post by ben_jones » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 6:47 PM UTC

Aunche wrote: post #40

Yet another white American who thinks that thinks that their personal moral grievances are more important than a billion Chinese people gaining access to Google. This is even worse than men telling women that abortion is evil because at least men can claim to speak for the fetus. I've yet to hear a convincing argument that Dragonfly make the lives of Chinese dissidents any worse, let alone regular residents.

Go clear your cookies, history, change your IP, and open Youtube. Take a look at what videos Google is promoting for you, then decide if the the family of Google products is that essential to human life.

Re: Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

#47

Post by icebraining » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 6:48 PM UTC

jamiequint wrote: post #41

IBM wrote: post #6

Brian Acton or anyone else feeling guilty about their ad-tech wealth: use your winnings to lobby for a federal privacy bill that is as strong and comprehensive as GDPR (and other EU privacy regulations). The industry is moving to enact something that maintains the status quo [1]. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/26/technology/tech-industry-...

Ironically, in a way similar to most legislation, GDPR will mostly benefit the largest tech companies at the expense of small startups that may eventually compete with them. Google, FB, et al have endless amounts of resources to comply with and litigate legislation like GDPR, whereas it's a substantial cost to smaller companies to do the same.

Which is why the GDPR has a reduced level of obligations for companies under 250 employees (see article 30).

Re: Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

#48

Post by ProAm » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 6:48 PM UTC

gunnihinn wrote: post #28

bilbo0s wrote: post #7

I actually applaud Poulson for leaving Google in protest of Google's Chinese business practices. Having mentioned that, I think I have to part ways with him when he implies that the correct way to "fix" this is to have the government come in and make these sorts of business decisions for the company. I don't believe in the government obliging businesses to do things. Especially when it looks like this whole thing is…

> Once government gets involved and starts playing favorites, everything gets messed up. OK. Is it more or less messed up than that a private corporation can and is willing to perform surveillance on foreign citizens on behalf of those citizens' government that would be unacceptable anywhere else?

Less

Re: Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

#49

Post by mrep » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 6:48 PM UTC

rajuvegesna wrote: post #5

Fundamental issue is the expectation that all public companies must keep growing and show profits quarter after quarter, year after year. This is obviously unsustainable. It is like a treadmill that keeps increasing speed. If you slow down, you are thrown out. If consecutive quarterly results are not good, CEO is typically thrown out. This pressure forces management to make unnatural decisions that might help short-t…

> Fundamental issue is the expectation that all public companies must keep growing and show profits quarter after quarter, year after year. This is obviously unsustainable.

Continuous growth is sustainable at or below world economic growth. It is obviously not sustainable above as eventually you would become the entire economy and thus you would equal world economic growth. However, economics is not zero sum as our economies have pretty continuously grown for centuries and there is no limit on economic growth.

Re: Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

#50

Post by ewjordan » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 6:49 PM UTC

partiallypro wrote: post #30

bitL wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't have the whole picture. Chinese might be open to some kind of a deal that could give Google share of the pie for a long time. If Internet really bifurcates and Chinese one spreads across most developing countries, it could pose a risk for Google to be left out of areas with majority of world's population.

Eric Schmidt said in a recent interview that the internet is going to split in two with China's version (censorship) v US's version (openness.) So...company behavior is matching that. I think the problem is that I firmly believe that freedom will win out in the long run. Chinese leadership will lose its grip once reality hits its economy, and Google's view is shortsighted in this regard imo. People will remember who…

Will the other tech companies be remembered for never resisting in the first place? IIRC Microsoft and Yahoo we're both like "censorship and tracking? HELL YEAH, where do we sign?" from day one.