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

251–260 of 378 posts

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

#251

Post by diminoten »

jostmey wrote: post #2

My take in the issue is that Google is being mismanaged. China will not allow a foreign company to compete against its home grown search engines, so why bother? By bowing to Chinese censorship, Google hurts its public image. Google's management should have expected that its employees, who joined Google on the premise of "Do not evil", would leak this to the public. In short, the people at the top of Google look like…

I'm sure some MBA has run the numbers and determined that operating in China provides $X over Y interval, I highly suspect another MBA has run the numbers and determined that operating in China costs $Z dollars to Google's brand, and I'd guess that X >>> Z.

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

#253

Post by int_19h »

test001only wrote: post #118
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.

Because government making decision based on morality is slippery slope as morality is very subjective and varies with people, race and religion. Also is not Republican the party which advocates small government?

Notions like "free speech is good" are themselves based on morality, and highly subjective. Yet we have them written not just into laws, but into our very Constitution.

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

#254

Post by int_19h »

beaner wrote: post #204
akiselev wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why though? We draw lines about what is legally acceptable or not all the time, often with little more guidance than subjective morality filtered through elected representation. There is a vast difference between Hugo Boss making Nazi uniforms and IBM selling them high tech machines designed to increase the efficiency of their extermination.

I'm not sure what you mean. I agree that there is a difference. So there should be a law blocking the 2nd type of activity. The lack of a law is implicit moral approval of the American people.

> The lack of a law is implicit moral approval of the American people.

Not at all. At most - if you assume that the political system is meaningfully representative of moral sentiment, which is a very big "if" - it is the lack of explicit disapproval, which is not the same as the lack of disapproval in general (because it could just be that most people don't judge because they don't know), and certainly not at all the same as approval.

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

#255

Post by coldtea »

ehsankia wrote: post #213
akira2501 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't believe in the government obliging businesses to do things. Yea, but I'm a big fan of regulated food, clean water and pollution standards. Upholding your obligations is a requirement to receiving the protection of the government as you conduct your business. It's a two-way street. > Especially when it looks like this whole thing is Google specific. The better question is whether Google is acting as a monopo…

> I'm a big fan of regulated food, clean water and pollution standards. You're comparing food and water to how a company does business in another country . These two things couldn't be more different. Does the US government also manage food and water in China? > The better question is whether Google is acting as a monopoly That's an entirely different question. The letter seemed to target the china problem directly,…

>You're comparing food and water to how a company does business in another country. These two things couldn't be more different.

How a company does business "in another country" reflects back on its own country (and can even have repercussions beyond image).

Google is always free to relocate their headquarters to another country and quit receiving the drawbacks of being a US company of course (along with any benefits that come with them)...

>If Google gets screwed for doing business in China while thousands of other companies get away with it, what kind of incentive does that show?

For one it shows that "doing business in China" is not a single, concrete thing, but there are tons of ways to do "business in China", some harmful and some not, and that might even depend on the industry.

E.g. selling Cokes to China: no big deal. Selling arms to China: might need some scrutiny. Selling Search technology to China catered to assist censorship: ditto.

So, the right question is not "why single out Google while other companies also do business with China", but rather "are these other companies in the SAME kind of business with China?".

And I'm not even against Google working in China, or following their local laws. Just want to point out obvious argument flaws.

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

#256

Post by oska »

oconnor663 wrote: post #103
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.

Look, my biases are much more in favor of the US govt than of China's, for all the obvious reasons. But we have to be able to see that this is opening a huge can of worms. For example, I think it's pretty troubling that the French government banned a bunch of Muslim religious garments. Does that mean I should advocate that various US companies need to stop doing business with France? Clearly there's _some_ level of a…

> For example, I think it's pretty troubling that the French government banned a bunch of Muslim religious garments.

You're either misinformed on the French legislation or, less charitably, willfully misrepresenting it. The legislation [1] passed by the French government was a ban on face coverings in public spaces. It included covering the face with balaclavas, full face helmets, masks and yes, full face veils such as the niqāb.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ban_on_face_covering

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

#257

Post by ForrestN »

akst wrote: post #240

Isn’t this out side the jurisdiction of US courts? This product isn’t operating in the US, so I’d be surprised if the court would do anything... To clarify I’m not a google Stan, I don’t even use gmail, it’s just that Google isn’t the only American business to launch in China, why is google being singled out here?

To answer your question without expressing an opinion myself: the people protesting Google's decision would probably cite the company's longstanding "Don't Be Evil" marketing, and the good publicity the company has sought in the past for refusing to do exactly what they are now doing.

Also, as far as timing, Google is being focused on now because they've just announced a major new product. Lots of other companies have been criticized in the past for complicity with China's brutal dictatorship.

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

#258

Post by diggerNick6771 »

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…

LOL @ all you arrogant idiots having a faux "high-brow" debate about Chinese politics while 80% of your possessions are...made in China. Particularly your digital "devices", i.e plastic electronic pieces of shit that control your lives. Google is bad for "doing business with an authoritarian regime", but it's okay when YOU do it. Amirite?

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

#259

Post by int_19h »

tomlagier wrote: post #53
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?

If that's your stance, shouldn't it apply to every company[1][2][3] that is already engaging in this? What makes Google a target for litigation here? edit: Not saying that because other companies do something similar that Google should get carte-blanche, just trying to see what the differentiation is. 1: https://qz.com/990662/microsoft-released-a-new-version-of-wi... 2: https://www.engadget.com/2018/07/18/apple-iclou…

Yes. We're long overdue for some house cleaning in that regard. You should not be able to run your company in US - enjoying the fruits of a free democratic society with rule of law, due process etc - and use those fruits to enable the opposite elsewhere in the world.

If Google, Facebook etc don't like it, they're welcome to move their headquarters and main campus to China. Then it will be an internal matter of China. So long as they're here, they should not be allowed to do things that our culture considers deeply inappropriate.

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

#260

Post by azernik »

diggerNick6771 wrote: post #258
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…

LOL @ all you arrogant idiots having a faux "high-brow" debate about Chinese politics while 80% of your possessions are... made in China . Particularly your digital "devices", i.e plastic electronic pieces of shit that control your lives. Google is bad for "doing business with an authoritarian regime", but it's okay when YOU do it. Amirite?

a) Buying things from China is different from implementing censorship systems for the Chinese government.

b) See the "In Comments" section of https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Specifically: "Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say face-to-face. Don't be snarky. Comments should get more civil and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."

Post reply on HN