Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 378 posts

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

#141

Post by shady-lady »

kodablah wrote: post #120
vkou wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Government-led heavy-handed oversight is so terrible that it also gave us rivers free of coal sludge, products that work as advertised, drugs that have to be tested before they are sold, airplanes that usually don't crash, and cars that are safer, more fuel efficient, and cleaner then they were before mandated seat belts, air bags, emission limits, and mileage gains. At this point, the nuclear option, like the GDPR,…

And the patriot act, and prohibition, and on and on. Not sure why pointing out unrelated positive or negative legislation affects the issue at hand. It's disingenuous to debate that way. Back to the issue at hand, I am specifically talking about heavy-handed oversight of the internet. The not-as-heavy-handed internet oversight we either already have or has been attempted is problematic and we should not double down o…

What are your views on net neutrality?

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

#142

Post by xapata »

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?

The USA has historically treated its corporations as extensions of its foreign policy [0].

[0] United Fruit.

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

#143

Post by blub »

pg_bot wrote: post #27

This "broad pattern of unaccountable decision making", also called permissionless innovation, is the reason why America has a culture of innovation. For those unaware, the United States runs on what I call "Air Bud rules", named for this scene from the children's movie.[0] To summarize, as long as there isn't a rule forbidding you from doing something, you can do it. While I applaud his personal stance on refusing to…

Your "permissionless innovation" is obliterating the well-being of the average American citizen (and others too).

At-will contracts, the gig economy, force arbitration, the privacy free-for-all, union busting, zero-hour contracts, privatised law enforcement, privatised medical care and all the other innovations created by US corporations.

And your proposed solution is absurd, by the way, and this can be easily demonstrated by the fact that few awful organisations had trouble finding qualified personnel.

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

#144

Post by blub »

TACIXAT wrote: post #139
mzs wrote: post #15

last week >Google hushing employees on Chinese search engine https://www.axios.com/google-china-dragonfly-employees-searc...

>The search engine requires users to log in to use its search features and tracks user's locations. It shares user's history with a Chinese partner. All searches would be connected to a personal phone number and user movements, along with the IP address of the device they used, would be recorded. How is this at all different from the US version?

In the US you don't get disappeared for your searches (yet).

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

#145

Post by pg_bot »

forapurpose wrote: post #66
pg_bot wrote: post #27

This "broad pattern of unaccountable decision making", also called permissionless innovation, is the reason why America has a culture of innovation. For those unaware, the United States runs on what I call "Air Bud rules", named for this scene from the children's movie.[0] To summarize, as long as there isn't a rule forbidding you from doing something, you can do it. While I applaud his personal stance on refusing to…

> This "broad pattern of unaccountable decision making", also called permissionless innovation, is the reason why America has a culture of innovation. I've seen that theory, but my understanding is that striking a proper balance is what fosters innovation; anarchy yields corruption and spoils for the powerful; it does not reward the most productive and innovative. Also, my impression is that other things may be much…

I'm not advocating for anarchy, just that we stick to the laws that are actually codified. We should be reactive to bad behavior, not proactive. Instead of blanket calls for regulation, we should be specific and considerate when making new rules as they often have unintended consequences. Instead of having to constantly ask for permission, you should be able to read the rules and make decisions independently. You don't hear about the millions of interactions that occur daily without consequence so I believe your views on corporations may be biased.

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

#146

Post by Spooky23 »

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.

Globalism is messy.

The west, particularly the US made a policy decision years ago that engaging with China commercially would yield benefits to China, the US, and the world. Arguably that was correct, although the predictions that making money would create a democratic society proved to be inaccurate.

If you wear men's undershirts, you're objectively abetting an authoritarian regime that allows companies in Bangladesh to systematically abuse textile workers. Is that ok?

At the end of the day, the Chinese have nukes and will do whatever they want to do. Why should Google suffer, when nothing is preventing Chinese services from launching in the US and competing with their properties?

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

#147

Post by mrep »

grandmczeb wrote: post #51
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?

I don’t think it’s more messed up for companies to follow the law of the country they’re operating in. Do you think it’s messed up that foreign companies comply with US laws?

Or that US tech companies have to comply with EU laws like GDPR?

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

#148

Post by jniedrauer »

pg_bot wrote: post #27

This "broad pattern of unaccountable decision making", also called permissionless innovation, is the reason why America has a culture of innovation. For those unaware, the United States runs on what I call "Air Bud rules", named for this scene from the children's movie.[0] To summarize, as long as there isn't a rule forbidding you from doing something, you can do it. While I applaud his personal stance on refusing to…

We don't even have to go back very far to find examples of American companies exploiting people to the point of knowingly killing them.[0]

> any solution that requires foregoing independent corporate decision making would be foolish

Whether you think less regulation or more regulation is better, you can't in good faith advocate for no regulation. Corporations have demonstrated many times over the years that they are profit maximizing algorithms with no regard for human life.

> For those who have been tasked with building tools that support authoritarian regimes, grow a spine, make your voice heard, and quit if necessary.

Once again, this makes very little sense in the context of history. Individual people are largely powerless when standing up to large organizations. Corporations do not self regulate and individuals cannot stop them. They are effectively a form of "very slow rogue AI" and the only way we seem to be able to control them, at least for a little while, is with central governments.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium_Girls

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

#149

Post by mulmen »

toss1 wrote: post #113
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?

Actually, YES, to the extent that the foreign policy is supporting & maintaining institutions & policies necessary for continued open democratic societies. By virtue of the US' historically strong support for open democracies (albeit often flawed or failed), and historical accident, it essentially now falls to the US to attempt to maintain it around the world. To the extent that we have failed to maintain and support…

I'm all for the US government supporting open democracy through foreign policy. The US electorate influences this policy.

I don't want Google making decisions based on anything other than how to make money legally.

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

#150

Post by [deleted] »

TACIXAT wrote: post #139
mzs wrote: post #15

last week >Google hushing employees on Chinese search engine https://www.axios.com/google-china-dragonfly-employees-searc...

>The search engine requires users to log in to use its search features and tracks user's locations. It shares user's history with a Chinese partner. All searches would be connected to a personal phone number and user movements, along with the IP address of the device they used, would be recorded. How is this at all different from the US version?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN