Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

Post by y4mi » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 8:41 PM UTC

stcredzero wrote: post #134

blub wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying "I don't believe in the government obliging businesses to do things." seems to me akin to not believing in gravity. The government - including the US government - is obliging all companies operating on its territory to do certain things. That's one of the roles of government.

Saying "I don't believe in the government obliging businesses to do things." seems to me akin to not believing in gravity. Believing in gravity doesn't mean that you then need to gain as much weight as possible. In fact, taking into account science like that, you might want to lose a certain amount of weight for your health. "The government obliging businesses to do things," is necessary, like carbohydrates are neces…

Post by femiagbabiaka » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 8:41 PM UTC

Aunche wrote: post #76

andrepd wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Post by stcredzero » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 8:44 PM UTC

blub wrote: post #159

stcredzero wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying "I don't believe in the government obliging businesses to do things." seems to me akin to not believing in gravity. Believing in gravity doesn't mean that you then need to gain as much weight as possible. In fact, taking into account science like that, you might want to lose a certain amount of weight for your health. "The government obliging businesses to do things," is necessary, like carbohydrates are neces…

The USG is doing too little of something. Namely of protecting citizens from predatory businesses.

Post by lotu » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 8:45 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).

Post by sctb » Wed, Sep 26, 2018, 8:48 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.