Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company • Hacker News Board

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

#291

Post by int_19h » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 12:47 AM UTC

tsunamifury wrote: post #270

int_19h wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

This is a nice platitude, but once you dig deeper you'll see that its not coherent. You're saying that companies are obligated to spread their home nation law to other nations, and conversely foreign companies to you in your own nation. I believe you'd find that extremely uncomfortable very quickly.

No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that American companies are obligated to not help other governments implement oppressive laws, or, in general, aid and abet in carrying out things that we consider despicable as a culture. This is not at all the same as American companies spreading American law elsewhere. The law should be applied to those companies operating here (in particular, any of their management and engineers here) not to their foreign customers.

Similarly, if China would punish any company that, say, does not censor information about Tienanmen protests here in US, that's their business. That does not push their censorship laws on me in any meaningful sense - it means that if I deal with a Chinese company, I get Chinese censorship, which is reasonable and expected; or I can deal with an American or a European company instead. There's no law applied to me either way.

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

#292

Post by DenisM » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 12:56 AM UTC

jaaron wrote: post #284

justinclift wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not yet. Maybe there should be. ;) With Google, it seems pretty fair to consider them a Monopoly in several areas. They also appear to be well down the path to abusing their Monopoly(ies?). Isn't that generally where regulators should become involved?

The point I think a few are trying to make is that the censorship in China issue is completely unrelated and irrelevant with respect to the monopoly issue. You want to break them up with anti-trust because they're a monopoly? Sure. Go ahead and investigate and figure that out. You want to ... punish/regulate/? them because they do business in China? You may not like it, but I don't see under what regulation or law yo…

>under what regulation or law you can do that?

this question is answered in the parent post to:

>>>There are no US laws against private companies building censorship tools in the US, let alone in China

>>Not yet. Maybe there should be [a new law -- DenisM]. ;)

If the problem is deemed severe a new law could be made that restricts participation in "oppressive activities", however they are defined. This would be similar to "trading with the enemy" act [1], or to COCOM [2], or to terrorism-related financial restrictions, or to Iran / N Korea / Russia sanctions.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trading_with_the_Enemy_Act_of_...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coordinating_Committee_for_Mul...

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

#293

Post by robotrout » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 12:56 AM UTC

msie wrote: post #281

robotrout wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You got a point there, but then banning niqabs puts the women between a rock and a hard place too.

No, it removes them from one, since the decision is made by the state, not by hubby and brother. Also, appeasement is not the answer. This fundamentalist backslide that has occurred over the last 40 years must be confronted, not encouraged. Liberals of the future will look back at how liberals of today are embracing this oppression with horror and disgust.

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

#294

Post by grandmczeb » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 12:58 AM UTC

int_19h wrote: post #261

grandmczeb wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think it’s more messed up for companies to follow the law of the country they’re operating in. Do you think it’s messed up that foreign companies comply with US laws?

The only one who can answer that question is a citizen of the country to which those foreign companies belong, because only they can judge it within their own cultural framework. And they're welcome to do so. And here, we're going to judge our companies by the standards of our society.

Shouldn't anyone be able to judge anything? I have no problem judging non-American companies, just as non-Americans seem to have no problem judging American ones.

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

#295

Post by 0x8BADF00D » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 1:00 AM UTC

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…

> What about all the other American companies doing business in China? Do they get to keep doing business because they are politically popular companies but Google is not? Or would this be a government mandate of a broad based American pull out?

Getting the US government involved period is a bad idea. Government interference in business is how big government starts. You need more and more agencies to police business behavior, and that eventually leads to large, inefficient, and inept bureaucratic agencies that do more harm than good. Example: EPA, FDA, etc

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

#296

Post by cyberpunk0 » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 1:04 AM UTC

0x8BADF00D wrote: post #295

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…

> What about all the other American companies doing business in China? Do they get to keep doing business because they are politically popular companies but Google is not? Or would this be a government mandate of a broad based American pull out? Getting the US government involved period is a bad idea. Government interference in business is how big government starts. You need more and more agencies to police business…

And without them stepping in you instead trade one corrupt, cancerous monopoly for multiple, virtually lawless corrupt, cancerous monopolies. Lose/lose for everyone except those already in power

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

#297

Post by earenndil » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 1:07 AM UTC

hazz99 wrote: post #288

s73v3r_ wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" Why should Google suffer" 1. I reject any notion that Google is somehow "suffering" if they don't go into China. 2. You're making it seem like Google is entitled to all the business it wants. That's not true in the least.

2. You're making it seem like Google is entitled to all the business it wants. That's not true in the least. Why not?

'Why not?' is never the right question to ask. The onus is on you to support a claim, you cannot demand of the other person to prove a negative.

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

#298

Post by sreya » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 1:11 AM UTC

0x8BADF00D wrote: post #295

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…

> What about all the other American companies doing business in China? Do they get to keep doing business because they are politically popular companies but Google is not? Or would this be a government mandate of a broad based American pull out? Getting the US government involved period is a bad idea. Government interference in business is how big government starts. You need more and more agencies to police business…

I'm not sure the EPA and FDA are the best examples you could've picked...

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

#299

Post by HappyDreamer » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 1:12 AM UTC

tensor wrote: post #42

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?

A company complying with the laws of the country it does business in seems fairly uncontroversial to me, even if you may not agree with those laws. Do you want your companies to be extensions of US foreign policy?

I this case it's controversial, unless one is pro dictatorship, or maybe just clueless.

Because the laws are controversial: They entail people get sent to prison, for speaking up against sexism or toxic air, or because they want some privacy, or because they criticize the government (well, dictatorship).

That is controversial. Unless one is fine with, or is clueless about, toxic air, sexual harassment, others going to prison because they disagree with the government (dictators).

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

#300

Post by thesagan » Thu, Sep 27, 2018, 1:15 AM UTC

wdewind wrote: post #229

jniedrauer wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't even have to go back very far to find examples of American companies exploiting people to the point of knowingly killing them.[0] > any solution that requires foregoing independent corporate decision making would be foolish Whether you think less regulation or more regulation is better, you can't in good faith advocate for no regulation. Corporations have demonstrated many times over the years that they are…

We can go back even less far to find examples of the US Federal Government doing arguably far worse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment There's this narrative that the major cause of improvement in conditions (civil rights, workers rights, child rights etc.) comes from government regulation. This is called legal prescriptivism. Another narrative is that things generally improve as the economy…

I wonder if—as a culture—we're limiting ourselves by habitually thinking in terms of public government and private enterprise; as if we need to find new concepts for grouping together people trying to solve problems.

I know I'm not adding much to the discussion with such vague notions, but I'd like to crack this vagueness a little beyond binary options that I, too, seem to habitually trap myself within.