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

Ex-Google Employee Urges Lawmakers to Take on Company

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–378 of 378 posts

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

#371

Post by slavik81 »

bogomipz wrote: post #353
slavik81 wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rodrigo Duterte. Strongmen often enjoy broad popular support. They get things done. Mussolini made the trains run on time. A cult of personality is how an authoritarian leader defends themselves from being overthrown by other members of their regime. They ensure that they are associated with all the good that their government does, while deflecting blame for the bad towards scapegoats. Worrying about fairness or the…

Duterte was democratically elected. He will be stepping down in 2022 and has already been voicing his support for Ferdinand Marcos Jr. >"Strongmen often enjoy broad popular support." "Strongman" is not even a real political term its a media term invented in the US media and first applied to General Noriega of Panama. The term doesn't even necessarily apply to official the head of state as was the case with Noriega. >…

> Duterte was democratically elected.

Yes. That's why I mentioned him. He is a legitimately popular politician with a strong authoritarian streak.

If I wanted to give you other examples of authoritarians, I would have suggested Hugo Chavez, Vladimir Putin, and Recep Tayyip Erdogan. They've all had their ups and downs in popularity, but mostly based on economic conditions.

China would have been the most relevant example to use, but it's more difficult to prove popularity without elections. Still, both official approval ratings[1] and anecdotal discussions[2] suggest that the government is particularly popular among those in rural areas who have seen rapid modernization.

[1]: https://www.economist.com/china/2015/04/11/the-critical-mass... [2]: https://www.quora.com/In-general-how-popular-are-the-Communi...

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

#372

Post by kapad »

tim333 wrote: post #354
titzer wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This "broad pattern of unaccountable decision making", also called permissionless innovation I'll take your permissionless innovation and raise you 8 million tons of plastic garbage going into the oceans every year[1], a depleted Ozone layer, black lung, asbestos, and unbreathable air. (Not to mention global warming--egad!) The problem is that industry "permissionlessly innovates" and because profitable innovations…

Re [1] you have to give pg_bot that the argument was "why America has a culture of innovation" and your counters are all basically non American. As to "8 million tons of plastic garbage going into the oceans every year[1], a depleted Ozone layer, black lung, asbestos, and unbreathable air. " America does rather well at getting rid of those, China is the biggest offender. It works in America because they do pass laws…

woah woah.. America just left the Paris accords. China is still committed to them.

> As to "8 million tons of plastic garbage going into the oceans every year[1], a depleted Ozone layer, black lung, asbestos, and unbreathable air. " America does rather well at getting rid of those, China is the biggest offender.

America is terrible at getting rid of those. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhous... USA is number 2 on that list. And worse, it's government is living in denial, with a president that's refuting climate change as a problem (and as mentioned earlier, has withdrawn the US as a signatory to the Paris agreement).

And this tells just part of the story. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... That's the list of countries by CO2 emissions on a per capita basis. Among the large economies of the world, the US is the first on that list and also way, way, way, ahead of China.

Again, this is just part of the story. We can't ignore historical figures for greenhouse gas emissions. China has only recently (since after the 1960s) become industrialized. It became a significant contributor to CO2 emissions only after about 1980, and even then it was way behind other countries. (way behind the US too). It's only recently, since about 2010, that China has overtaken USA as the largest emitter of CO2 and other green house gases. Even then, on a per capita basis, it's way behind the USA.

And you say "America does rather well at getting rid of those, China is the biggest offender." That statement is so factually incorrect it verges on being ludicrous.

Get your facts straight, and then when it comes time for another election, vote for the senator, congressman or president that considers climate change a serious issue and has an agenda of fixing the US contributions to CO2 and other green house gas emissions.

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

#373

Post by kapad »

pg_bot wrote: post #27

This "broad pattern of unaccountable decision making", also called permissionless innovation, is the reason why America has a culture of innovation. For those unaware, the United States runs on what I call "Air Bud rules", named for this scene from the children's movie.[0] To summarize, as long as there isn't a rule forbidding you from doing something, you can do it. While I applaud his personal stance on refusing to…

Wait.. hold on for a second.. and think about the following points.

1. Campaigns cost a lot of money.

2. Private organizations fund political campaigns.

3. A legislator's constitutional job is to maintain an effective set of rules for a country/state/city whatever.

4. Is the democratic process effective in voting in the best legislators?

4.a. or is the democratic process the best at voting in the best fund raisers?

5. With the massive amounts of private capital, are the best innovators, engineers and builders succeeding or are the best fund raisers succeeding?

6. Is private capital largely responsible for the success of new companies (ventures) as well as aspiring legislators?

Well, not everything is so black and white as those points, but looking at one extreme perspective, does raise many concerns in my mind. The primary one being, "is democracy reaching it's breaking point?"

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

#374

Post by specialist »

darpa_escapee wrote: post #303
hueving wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What standards are you referring to? There are no US standards or laws against what Google is proposing.

Ethical standards.

Why would Google help another govt censor their own citizens?

To curry favor, some kind of quid pro quo. Aka a bribe.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Corrupt_Practices_Act

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

#375

Post by [deleted] »

ehsankia wrote: post #213
akira2501 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't believe in the government obliging businesses to do things. Yea, but I'm a big fan of regulated food, clean water and pollution standards. Upholding your obligations is a requirement to receiving the protection of the government as you conduct your business. It's a two-way street. > Especially when it looks like this whole thing is Google specific. The better question is whether Google is acting as a monopo…

> I'm a big fan of regulated food, clean water and pollution standards. You're comparing food and water to how a company does business in another country . These two things couldn't be more different. Does the US government also manage food and water in China? > The better question is whether Google is acting as a monopoly That's an entirely different question. The letter seemed to target the china problem directly,…

[deleted]

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

#376

Post by tim333 »

kapad wrote: post #372
tim333 wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re [1] you have to give pg_bot that the argument was "why America has a culture of innovation" and your counters are all basically non American. As to "8 million tons of plastic garbage going into the oceans every year[1], a depleted Ozone layer, black lung, asbestos, and unbreathable air. " America does rather well at getting rid of those, China is the biggest offender. It works in America because they do pass laws…

woah woah.. America just left the Paris accords. China is still committed to them. > As to "8 million tons of plastic garbage going into the oceans every year[1], a depleted Ozone layer, black lung, asbestos, and unbreathable air. " America does rather well at getting rid of those, China is the biggest offender. America is terrible at getting rid of those. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_green…

The [1] list doesn't include CO2. It's a different kind of problem.

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

#377

Post by tsunamifury »

int_19h wrote: post #331
tsunamifury wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are ultimately saying within a sovereign nation you should abide by the law of that nation but the cultural values of another.

And again, no. I'm saying that you should abide by the law of the nation where you're performing an activity - say, designing and implementing some piece of software - regardless of where the fruits of your labor will eventually be deployed. And the law of that nation will, of course, be based on its cultural values. So if the culture of that nation frowns upon helping to oppress people in certain ways, then you shal…

I think the idea of a corporation as a single nationalized identity is where we disagree, and probably the law breaks down as well. As in function this is not true.

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

#378

Post by int_19h »

tsunamifury wrote: post #377
int_19h wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And again, no. I'm saying that you should abide by the law of the nation where you're performing an activity - say, designing and implementing some piece of software - regardless of where the fruits of your labor will eventually be deployed. And the law of that nation will, of course, be based on its cultural values. So if the culture of that nation frowns upon helping to oppress people in certain ways, then you shal…

I think the idea of a corporation as a single nationalized identity is where we disagree, and probably the law breaks down as well. As in function this is not true.

Well, for starters, any corporation is headquartered somewhere, and I think it's not at all unreasonable that the country where it takes place can attach strings to it. After all, corporations don't pick a spot for their headquarters arbitrarily - they derive certain benefits from it - and if they are dodging the associated costs, then we have a free rider problem.

But even setting that aside, my emphasis isn't on the corporation itself so much so as individuals working in it, who are the ones actually doing those things. I don't see why we can't impose restrictions on our residents, saying that they e.g. can't enable oppressive foreign regimes. And that, in practice, would have the same effect on the corporation - they wouldn't be able to do it here, and they'd have to relocate that entire operation into China or another place that would allow it.

Or prohibit any resident from profiting from it, for that matter, e.g. by investing in a foreign corporation that does such things - which would also preclude US corporations from establishing foreign subsidiaries to dodge the responsibility but still partake in the profits.

Post reply on HN