Live data from Hacker News

Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

newsweek.com

101–110 of 206 posts

Re: Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

#101
post #76
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are we to assume that they are even more cryptomilitaryindistrial than Google? No. But those others haven't managed to convince too many that hey are "not Evil" or some like that bullshit. Once they made that proclamation they get a nice PR boost, but when they are perceived to not abide by it, they should accept the corresponding criticism.

> But those others haven't managed to convince too many that hey are "not Evil" or some like that bullshit. The "American Hospital Association" probably has very few people who think it is evil.

I guess you haven't read the HN threads on hospital costs in the US. Here's a sample https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6838269

Re: Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

#102
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DARPA point wasn't the only point of insanity. I just don't have the patience to sit and list out why his other points are equally silly for anyone versed in the space. The DARPA point was the easiest to explain and the most accessible for the Hacker News audience.

> I just don't have the patience to sit and list out why his other points are equally silly for anyone versed in the space. In other words, your argument is: if it isn't self-evident to you that I'm right and Assange is wrong then that can only be because you are so profoundly ignorant that it is not even worth making the effort to educate you, or even to point you to a reference. You'll have to pardon me if I don't…

No, man. It just means its time consuming for me to write more stuff.

Re: Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

#103

I did not realize what a nut Assange has become. The more there is the danger that he might be forgotten, the more ridiculous his theories of the world. However, you have to think about his target audience. The audience doesn't consist of people who are familiar with things like DARPA grants, and think tanks. For people in the know, this writing will read like lunacy, because they will understand that Assange sees de…

The Naval Surface Warfare Lab funded my high school robotics team trip to Seattle. I must be really evil.

Re: Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

#104
post #88

A lot of innuendo and guilt by association, political conspiracy ala Kevin Bacon. I suppose isolation tends to produce conspiracy theories. I'll get down voted for this of course. When Assange is raising concerns about a potential Google monopoly over the whole of the internet, he is of course, raising a legitimate concern. But the attempts by Assange, and people like Yasha Levine, to tie Google into the military ind…

It's not mentioned in the article, but Google acquired Boston Dynamics, a military contractor.

And? Do you think Google is going to build robot weapons for the defense department? Or, do you think this was an IP and talent Acquihire?

That's what I mean by guilt-by-association. Elon Musk tried to buy Russian ICBMs, was he trying to build intercontinental ballistic missiles for nuking, or was he trying to get to Mars?

Re: Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

#105

> By mid-August we discovered that a former German employee—whom I had suspended in 2010—was cultivating business relationships with a variety of organizations and individuals by shopping around the location of the encrypted file, paired with the password’s whereabouts in the book I remember reading Daniel Domscheit-Berg's (or was known as Daniel Schmidt, I think) book "Inside WikiLeaks", which talked about Assange's…

Paranoia is one thing. But I don't think it's paranoid to state that conspiracies exist. 5 years ago, people were called crazy for suggesting that the NSA were eavesdropping on the entire internet.

This particular article outlines the well-known links between NGOs and the US administration, and the probable ulterior motives underlying NGOs' stated objectives (i.e. 'human rights' etc). I don't think this is a paranoid theory.

Re: Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

#106
post #91

Sadly, I found the following pieces gave Assange so little credibility that if he had just written about the last 3rd of the article, it would seem more credible to me. If a suspended employee was shopping around "the location of the encrypted file, paired with the password’s whereabouts" and in "two weeks most intelligence agencies, contractors and middlemen would have all the cables", wouldn't you just move the fil…

> wouldn't you just move the files and change the password? Quoting from http://unspecified.wordpress.com/2011/09/03/wikileaks-passwo... - "speculation says that since it was on the WikiLeaks server temporarily, and WikiLeaks was aggressively mirroring their site to avoid being taken down, it was copied within the few hours that it was available online, and spread from there." Quoting from http://en.wikipedia.org/wik…

I wasn't proposing that the leaks be published without names being redacted, so with your comment regarding having names and such redacted to protect people.

I'm not sure I agree regarding slow leaks to keep pressure up. If that was the purpose, do you think that has been effective?

I don't think we all have 'political agendas', I would hope that most of us have humanitarian agendas which manifest themselves through political influence. There are definitely those with political agendas, but I don't think it's the majority.

Re: Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

#107
So Google does business with the U.S. government? No duh. It's not exactly a state secret, it's not like Google doesn't post job openings at the Washington D.C. and Reston, VA locations for people who want to sell and support the government.

Here's the contract awards

http://www.usaspending.gov/search?form_fields=%7B%22search_t...

https://www.fpds.gov/ezsearch/search.do?indexName=awardfull&...

Of course they want to sell to the government. The government has money.

Re: Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

#108
post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What are they [Google] suppose to do? Not have a business model predicated on datamining users' information, and build their systems in such a way that they are unable to collect troves of unnecessary information. But the only way we'll ever see any change is through users/developers: Detach yourself from such businesses. Don't build your dream on top of their corrupted platform. And if you must use some of their s…

Basically, you're saying to just not create a business like Google. That's not a practical solution because... money. If there's an opportunity to make money, it will be taken. Even the illegal & immoral ones, not to even talk about perfectly legal avenues. More tangible problems with your idea of never collecting huge amounts of userdata are: - If Google didn't collect userdata, I suspect their search wouldn't be wo…

Yes. Users wising up will hopefully put an end to that money. Your statement is similar to saying that ending the NSA is not a practical solution because "power". So our personal autonomy is fucked because money and power - I'm willing to admit that this may be the inevitable answer, but in what way is it productive?

It's indeed hard to imagine a world in which users control their data - that is the extent of how hard we've been pwned.

Some of these systems were in place long before the issue could possibly be on anyone's radar, and would/will take quite a lot of work to extricate ourselves. anonymous payments - hard, especially now with Bitcoin on the scene. cell service - a bit harder, TOR+wifi+bearer payment for programmatic wifi access. physical address obfuscation - even harder, physical package mix network backed by repu (fuck, I give up).

But Youtube? You could write a software frontend tomorrow that avoided being Google's slave by not sending cookies. Comments would be a little harder, but that's a feature - I think a recent study showed glancing at those actually causes brain cancer. Beyond that, I guess TOR to scrub IPs until a better (high-latency) mix network comes along.

Email is a broken naive protocol like HTTP which relies on centralized identities, and can thus never really be secured. But secure messaging itself is a low hanging fruit. The fact we don't have it already shows that we seriously need to invest effort into building the ladder.

Re: Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

#109

I suggest that people reading these comments look through the posting histories of the people bashing Assange and make a judgement about whether or not they're real people. You be the judge.

We're all real people, you're the one who created a throwaway account to question other peoples motives.

Re: Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

#110

A lot of innuendo and guilt by association, political conspiracy ala Kevin Bacon. I suppose isolation tends to produce conspiracy theories. I'll get down voted for this of course. When Assange is raising concerns about a potential Google monopoly over the whole of the internet, he is of course, raising a legitimate concern. But the attempts by Assange, and people like Yasha Levine, to tie Google into the military ind…

the attempts by Assange, and people like Yasha Levine, to tie Google into the military industrial complex are weak sauce The historical, current and future involvement of senior Google executives in US foreign policy, their self-description and in some cases their personal identification as middle-east focused was, I felt, well illustrated in the article. The DARPA point is tangential.

Though the article was focused on middle-east related activities, would your argument change if the article mentioned an equal number of South American or Asia focused conferences/think tanks, etc. etc.

It's interesting that we keep saying US foreign policy, but I wonder if it truly is US only, or if Google's connections in other countries have similar connections and activities? If they do, does that change how we feel about these?

Post reply on HN