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

Sundar Pichai warns of threats to internet freedom

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 256 posts

Re: Sundar Pichai warns of threats to internet freedom

#191

Post by pessimizer »

arcturus17 wrote: post #162
benreesman wrote: post #133

I’ve never met a person inspired by what we thought the Internet would be in the 90s who isn’t sad that it went the way it did. I suspect the more idealistic of the cryptocurrency people will also feel nostalgic when Goldman and JP Morgan run blockchain in a few years. It’s extremely tempting, especially to technical people, to believe that some piece of technology will create net freedom and equality. The reality is…

Utopian thinking almost never comes to fruition because by definition it discounts a lot of negatives. It rarely comes from a place of first-principles reasoning about human behavior. And above all, human beings cannot see into the future so any vision is always incomplete and flawed. Nevertheless, as much as there are heaps of shit on the internet - digital surveillance, bottomless wells of inane addiction, hateful…

The only real benefit I see is 1) Wikipedia, Sci-Hub, Archive/LibGen, and 2) the increase in general literacy that came from people commenting/posting.

I think 2) gets underestimated a lot - 10 years ago you could recognize a lot of stupid comments by the fact that they capitalized every word or the grammar and spelling were horrific. Those people didn't stop posting, they learned how to express themselves well through practice.

Re: Sundar Pichai warns of threats to internet freedom

#192

Post by danielschonfeld »

snowwrestler wrote: post #78

Does anyone think that Google cares about the free and open Internet anymore? I don’t mean they oppose it, I just mean it doesn’t seem like it’s on the list of things the company prioritizes. It sometimes seems like Google’s internal self-image is stuck in 2001, when they were an idealistic search engine company whose goal was to organize the world’s information. Today they are an ad company, running some office apps…

To echo that sentiment. Does anyone believe Google under Sundar Pichai actually believes in anything open and private, given how many google employees during his reign have tried to organize against what google stands for, only to be shut down.

I find it grotesquely comical to even see this headline with Sundar Pichai's name attached to it.

Re: Sundar Pichai warns of threats to internet freedom

#193

Post by ar_lan »

Dah00n wrote: post #142
zimpenfish wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to say, I find this bit amusing: "That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I'd point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say." The last 4 years of US politics (and 20? of UK politics) have given the lie to that belief. [edit: added UK politics because they're just as bad]

Are you saying most people would answer Yes to "Are politicians trustworthy?" because then I clearly live in a completely different bubble than you do and have a very different interpretation of TV speaking heads talking about the issue. In my bubble at least 90% would say that US politicians are not trustworthy (no idea about UK). Not much different if you ask about Trump or Biden either.

I'm fairly confident you cannot get to the higher levels of politics without skeletons in your closet.

Re: Sundar Pichai warns of threats to internet freedom

#194

Post by pessimizer »

Dah00n wrote: post #170
saalweachter wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, your view of other people's cynicism is too absolute. People distrust politicians ... except . Except for their favorite politician, except for their party, except for the ones they voted for, except... You see this with Congress writ large. People hate Congress, its approval ratings are through the floor. But they like their own Congresspeople. Sure, gerrymandering, safe districts, etc, but by and large people a…

> Except for their favorite politician, except for their party, except for the ones they voted for, except... As I wrote in another reply I believe this to be A Very American Thing. At least I have never heard of anyone here (in Denmark) seeing themselves as represented by a person. It is more of a party thing. I'm sure I live in a bubble (don't we all) so my experience might not match any official numbers but in my…

> At least I have never heard of anyone here (in Denmark) seeing themselves as represented by a person. It is more of a party thing.

This might be a parliamentary democracy thing. In the US, everything is about borders and leaders. You're happy with corrupt politicians because corrupt politicians are connected politicians, and they might bring benefits to your state/district.

Re: Sundar Pichai warns of threats to internet freedom

#195

Post by pessimizer »

m1sta_ wrote: post #14

I do hope that people read the article and comment on its contents rather than just getting stuck in a loop of "Google bad".

Why? The only reason Pichai's comments are important is because he works for a company that is dangerous for internet freedom. Their only use is in predicting Google's business strategies and defending against them.

This might as well be a place to talk about Google in general, or Pichai in general irt "internet freedom."

Re: Sundar Pichai warns of threats to internet freedom

#196

Post by imwillofficial »

cromwellian wrote: post #128
imwillofficial wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It properly calls attention to what google’s primary purpose is. Its not search. A newspaper’s primary purpose is to inform the public, and make money while doing so. Googles primary purpose is not search, and to make money while doing so. Googles primary purpose is collect and sell data, and make money while doing so.

Google doesn’t sell data, and Google’s primary purpose is Search and organizing information, ads is just the way it’s funded. If the primary purpose was ada, then it would stop all of the wasteful spending on engineering projects with no relation to, and no hope of, making ad money.

You’re right on the not selling data directly. I should have been more precise.

Google is in the business of collecting data and selling advertising using that data. For the purpose of making money.

Search hasn’t been part of their purpose in decades.

Let me ask you this, has search gotten better or worse in the last 5 - 10 years? Has their data collection gotten more invasive or less over the last 5 - 10 years?

I think we both know what kind of company Google is once those questions are answered.

Re: Sundar Pichai warns of threats to internet freedom

#197

Post by [deleted] »

danielschonfeld wrote: post #192
snowwrestler wrote: post #78

Does anyone think that Google cares about the free and open Internet anymore? I don’t mean they oppose it, I just mean it doesn’t seem like it’s on the list of things the company prioritizes. It sometimes seems like Google’s internal self-image is stuck in 2001, when they were an idealistic search engine company whose goal was to organize the world’s information. Today they are an ad company, running some office apps…

To echo that sentiment. Does anyone believe Google under Sundar Pichai actually believes in anything open and private, given how many google employees during his reign have tried to organize against what google stands for, only to be shut down. I find it grotesquely comical to even see this headline with Sundar Pichai's name attached to it.

[deleted]

Re: Sundar Pichai warns of threats to internet freedom

#199

Post by shuntress »

benreesman wrote: post #133

I’ve never met a person inspired by what we thought the Internet would be in the 90s who isn’t sad that it went the way it did. I suspect the more idealistic of the cryptocurrency people will also feel nostalgic when Goldman and JP Morgan run blockchain in a few years. It’s extremely tempting, especially to technical people, to believe that some piece of technology will create net freedom and equality. The reality is…

> technology is just a fancy word for tool

The form and function of the tool have a significant impact on its use.

If installing & maintaining a home server (just a domain name and static content like vacation pictures) were as simple as setting up a fridge, more people would probably run home servers.

Re: Sundar Pichai warns of threats to internet freedom

#200

Post by cblconfederate »

Nasrudith wrote: post #180
cblconfederate wrote: post #100

as far as state actors are concerned, it's state propaganda that 's the greatest threat and big tech is actually facilitating this because it's structurally convenient for autocrats. For the rest, google is a company that can actually do things about the free internet, so actions are better than words here

Faciliating is a downright weasel word to insinuate complicity. Power lines facilitate power outages - without the transport there would be no power to out. And where the heck does the "Because it is structurally convenient to autocrats" conclusion come from and what the hell does that even mean? On another note does anybody else notice the inherent contradiction and massive exploitability of the "state propaganda is…

> Faciliating is a downright weasel word to insinuate complicity.

That's not ruled out. Big tech employs thousands of people who may or may not be bought out to cover the tracks of authoritarians, even if we assume (absurdly) that their leadership are saints.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/apr/13/facebook-...

> structurally convenient

Social media are centralized, have no direct interest in the stability of the country they operate in, are not in any control from the users of the target country, are perceived as neutral by said users, YET they are in control of the government where they operate in, and certain countries often run campaigns targetted against their own citizens. They generally don't investigate such actions until after the fact, and in fact i ve only seen facebook doing somewhat serious attempts to catch them in the act e.g. https://about.fb.com/news/2020/10/removing-coordinated-inaut...

Post reply on HN