11–20 of 113 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't it? It's hard to interpret https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/12/leaked-video-googl... otherwise.
The politics of private citizens are their own business and explicitly not the government's. Furthermore even if that had any bearing on their search results whatever google presents on their own damn website is also none of the government's business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't it? It's hard to interpret https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/12/leaked-video-googl... otherwise.
The politics of private citizens are their own business and explicitly not the government's. Furthermore even if that had any bearing on their search results whatever google presents on their own damn website is also none of the government's business.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The politics of private citizens are their own business and explicitly not the government's. Furthermore even if that had any bearing on their search results whatever google presents on their own damn website is also none of the government's business.
It is if Google wants DMCA safe harbour protections
Also we should all want section 230 protection it's what preserves free speech online and the principle on which the whole web economy is built.
I don’t get it. What could Pichai possibly gain from participating in this kind of theatrics?
I don’t get it. What could Pichai possibly gain from participating in this kind of theatrics?
Not appearing to be giving the finger to congress, as it looked when he failed to show up to the last set of hearings? Pissing off congress is rarely a good idea.
I'm not sure why Congress thinks it can at the drop of a hat order a CEO to participate in their media theatrics, and then pitch a fit when the company says "he/she is busy, we're going to send our top legal expert, who should know about the stuff you're concerned with (law) anyway."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't it? It's hard to interpret https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/12/leaked-video-googl... otherwise.
Just because a company's leadership dislikes Trump doesn't mean they'll ruin the integrity of their product.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The politics of private citizens are their own business and explicitly not the government's. Furthermore even if that had any bearing on their search results whatever google presents on their own damn website is also none of the government's business.
It's funny to hear someone only ever make this argument when what is being censored is conservative. If it were the opposite way, and they were blocking results on, say, the travel ban, or competing startups, people would be up in arms.
I don’t get it. What could Pichai possibly gain from participating in this kind of theatrics?
The reason people testify before Congress is because they ultimately have no choice. Congress has this nuclear option called a "subpoena"[1] to force you to appear.
Now, with prominent people like CEOs and baseball celebrities, it never escalates to the point of issuing a formal subpoena and having Federal marshalls arrest and forcibly drag them into Congressional chambers.
Instead what happens is that Congress members "ask nicely" for somebody to testify (e.g. Sundar Pichai) and then the CEO gets with his lawyers and then coordinates with Congress on a reasonable date to appear. Of course, the CEO can try some stalling tactics (e.g. talk to some Congress members "off the record", etc) to buy some time... but ultimately, he's going to have to face Congress sooner or later. The more promptly the requested witness willingly appears before Congress, the better it is for public perception.
It's better if the CEO shows cooperation with Congress. The totally opposite tactic is for the CEO to show up and refuse to answer any questions by constantly pleading the 5th Amendment through the entire proceeding. That would look really really bad.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress#Subpoenas
Hopefully he will testify about Project Dragonfly as well. Human rights concerns should not get lost in the noise of partisan politics. EDIT: Also, here is a slightly better stub article with an actual quote from Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte. https://thehill.com/policy/technology/408972-house-judiciary...
Hopefully he will testify about Project Dragonfly as well. Human rights concerns should not get lost in the noise of partisan politics. EDIT: Also, here is a slightly better stub article with an actual quote from Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte. https://thehill.com/policy/technology/408972-house-judiciary...
What exactly would an international corporation like Google gain if they'd start being a tool of American external politics and propaganda? Besides being kicked out of their other markets (EU, India, Russia) Trump considers enemies right now?
[0] http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/udhr/article_19.html [1] https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/08/28/open-letter-google-repor...