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

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

#71

Post by andrepd » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 7:00 PM UTC

tensor wrote: post #42

gunnihinn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Ah right, "following the laws", because discussions of morality can be reduced to whether it "follows the law" or not? No, that's absurd. Google is objectively abetting an authoritarian regime and providing it with extremely useful tools to maintain and strengthen totalitarian control over 1.4 billion people, and this is wrong.

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

#72

Post by ocdtrekkie » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 7:00 PM UTC

notriddle wrote: post #55

thrillgore wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think after the last election, the moral panic du jour was aimed at tech companies. Russian hackers on Facebook, clickbait...it's all lead to this. And the dialog is manufactured to make Google a villain. I'm not sure who the bigger villain is here: Google, or whoever wants to cut them down.

More specifically, the political pundits latched onto a thing that has been around for over a decade. Tor has been around since 2006, and mixmaster is even older than that. The anti-adtech privacy movement is not new, but the interest coming from mainstream political talking heads is.

The difference is that after the Russian interference thing, politicians realized all of this Internet stuff they didn't understand can cost them re-election.

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

#73

Post by fooqux » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 7:01 PM UTC

bogomipz wrote: post #58

tensor wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

>"Do you want your companies to be extensions of US foreign policy?" No but it would be nice if they at least upheld the same values of the country that they themselves are a product of. Or are values just things you can draw arbitrary borders around when it's convenient?

What are laws besides a culture's values written down in the form of rules?

I'm only being mildly pedantic here. Obviously, there are some silly laws that don't work here; I'm talking about the large obvious ones that everyone knows about.

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

#74

Post by beaner » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 7:01 PM UTC

awakeasleep wrote: post #61

tensor wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

You're looking at the question from a really nihilistic-libertarian perspective. IBM was following the law when it sold the nazis tools for tracking 'undesirable' people. Google's search engine will be used to track the Uyghur, and the Uyghurs are being sent to reeducation camps at this very moment. We're talking about an apples to apples comparison here. It's controversial _as hell_ to sell tools used to do genocide…

If that's true, it says to me that governments should put a blanket block on doing certain types of business with that specific country. Such a block should apply to all companies equally. It doesn't require them to be more involved in decisions from within the companies.

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

#75

Post by eli_gottlieb » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 7:03 PM UTC

tensor wrote: post #42

gunnihinn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

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

I'd rather have companies be extensions of US policy, than make US policy themselves.

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

#76

Post by Aunche » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 7:06 PM UTC

andrepd wrote: post #71

tensor wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Ah right, "following the laws", because discussions of morality can be reduced to whether it "follows the law" or not? No, that's absurd. Google is objectively abetting an authoritarian regime and providing it with extremely useful tools to maintain and strengthen totalitarian control over 1.4 billion people, and this is wrong.

Objectively, Google is extending its services to a billion people while maintaining the status quo of censorship. Stopping Google from expanding to China is basically another form of censorship, which is wrong.

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

#77

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 7:07 PM UTC

fooqux wrote: post #73

bogomipz wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Do you want your companies to be extensions of US foreign policy?" No but it would be nice if they at least upheld the same values of the country that they themselves are a product of. Or are values just things you can draw arbitrary borders around when it's convenient?

What are laws besides a culture's values written down in the form of rules? I'm only being mildly pedantic here. Obviously, there are some silly laws that don't work here; I'm talking about the large obvious ones that everyone knows about.

[deleted]

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

#78

Post by RegicidalManiac » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 7:07 PM UTC

I trust Google management over Government any day. We do not want to Google to then engage in war mongering, fear mongering either.

I think increased Trade with China is better. American companies having larger footprint in China is better for them and Americans.

I think Chinese will have to give up their censorship over long term.

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

#79

Post by yeahforsureman » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 7:07 PM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #47

jamiequint wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

Not really. You're talking about an exception to only one obligation (record-keeping). And even that is relevant only where the processing is "not occasional".

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

#80

Post by PurpleBoxDragon » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 7:09 PM UTC

tensor wrote: post #42

gunnihinn wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

>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.

Depends on what those laws are. Imagine if Google was deliberately helping out with some genocide to make a dollar? And given some stories coming from China, that isn't exactly a what-if situation.

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

They have to be extensions of US morals to the extent voters don't push for them to be punished for not being so. That's a byproduct of using democracy.