Google also operate in USA. USA has more people in prison than Turkey has. Recently journalist Max Blumenthal was jailed on false charges.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21824570 and marked it off-topic.
Google's Monopoly-Based Foreign Policy
111–120 of 160 posts
Re: Google's Monopoly-Based Foreign Policy
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google doesn't have armies and police forces. It can't "force" anyone to do anything, unlike governments. Deciding not to provide its services is not a use of force from google.
Many believe internet access is a basic human right. [1] Thus, many believe that pulling out of a country where your device is one of the sole affordable ways of reaching the internet is tantamount to a human rights violation. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_Internet_access
There are many alternatives to every service Google offers, even though it might not be as good as Google's offering.
Re: Google's Monopoly-Based Foreign Policy
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many believe internet access is a basic human right. [1] Thus, many believe that pulling out of a country where your device is one of the sole affordable ways of reaching the internet is tantamount to a human rights violation. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_Internet_access
Many people believe abortion is murder. That doesn’t make it so.
"Don't introduce flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents."
Re: Google's Monopoly-Based Foreign Policy
#114Ah, it's so nice to have my morning coffee with my daily fresh anti-Google story on the front page of Hacker News. Our lives just wouldn't be the same without it.
Yeah, I don't get it. FB is being openly evil with the political ads thing, but Google is the devil somehow? I suspect a smear campaign.
Re: Google's Monopoly-Based Foreign Policy
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ongoing support for the Turkish market. Technical support staff who can speak Turkish, documentation in the Turkish language, and a team of developers to handle Turkish-specific i18n bugs. None of these are 'incremental' costs.
My thinking is that if this argument is true, Google should be the one making it. They don’t need HN to “reverse engineer” a defense for them, particularly one that may not be factually correct.
Please don't shift goalposts - you asked a question (on HN!), got an answer here (based on conjecture), and you now want an official Google response that breaks down the reasons?
Re: Google's Monopoly-Based Foreign Policy
#116Yea there's alot of emotional bickering that comes up when a company says "we won't do business with X". >In other words, Google has a private sanctions regime against smaller countries. With this stupid statement, my company must have a private sanctions regime agaisnt half the world
The distinction is that if your company boycotted another, is unlikely to ever be diplomatically or politically important; unless you work at Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, or Google
Or the boycott is part of a common industry practice like Disney/ Netflix distribution rules.
Re: Google's Monopoly-Based Foreign Policy
#117Ah, it's so nice to have my morning coffee with my daily fresh anti-Google story on the front page of Hacker News. Our lives just wouldn't be the same without it.
It almost feels like there is an active campaign against them at this point. There used to be a smear campaign against Google which was orchestrated by Facebook a while ago, around the time when Cambridge Analytica scandal was discovered, just to take the heat off themselves. It is difficult to guess who is behind this new campaign.
Re: Google's Monopoly-Based Foreign Policy
#118On paper, this is not really wrong. You can't force a shop owner to sell his products to you if he doesn't want to. Similarly, I just don't have the rights in forcing you to sell your house to me. I'm sure services like Netflix or Disney Plus are probably still not available in some countries. If you visit their website from those places, you would likely get a service denial message. It's within Google's rights to offer/withdraw their services to any places they wish.
Having said that, maybe there was a better solution they could have implemented instead. Something like this should only be the very last choice on the list after exhausting all other options.
Re: Google's Monopoly-Based Foreign Policy
#119On paper, this is not really wrong. You can't force a shop owner to sell his products to you if he doesn't want to. Similarly, I just don't have the rights in forcing you to sell your house to me. I'm sure services like Netflix or Disney Plus are probably still not available in some countries. If you visit their website from those places, you would likely get a service denial message. It's within Google's rights to o…
> You can't force a shop owner to sell his products to you if he doesn't want to.
The very first article of the Dutch constitution actually says that people have to be treated equally in equal cases. If you live in a country with a similar principle, do you know how this works with someone refusing to do business with you? If they sell to your peer, wouldn't they have to have a reason for not selling to you (i.e. to indicate that the case is unequal)?
A reason like creditworthiness or "looking like you won't pay the bill" may or may not be sufficient, I'm not questioning which reasons may be used. I'm just wondering if it's true that a shop can indeed refuse someone for no reason at all.
For those who are curious about the phrasing, source (in Dutch unfortunately): https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0001840/2018-12-21
Re: Google's Monopoly-Based Foreign Policy
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
Going from "access to internet" to "selling Android phones" is a pretty big leap.
in many places it really isn't
Then why not force apple to start selling iPhones for dirt cheap if owning a cellphone is a human right? Surely they are even more of a violator of human rights because their phones are so prohibitively expensive and they operate in fewer markets than Google?
Even accepting your ridiculous premises, none of this makes sense.