Google Calls for Action on Web Limits

Discussion in 'privacy general' started by Dogbiscuit, Mar 24, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    Article
     
  2. CloneRanger

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Posts:
    4,833
    That wouldn't be the sex trade, would it :D
     
  3. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    *sigh* I hate this political BS that often gets spouted. Since when was censorship a "human rights" issue? Does anyone actually understand what human rights ARE anymore? All Google is doing is putting on a good PR campaign, trying to make themselves look better to the media and privacy advocates. Does anyone not get that Google is a data collection company far more than a search giant, and has been for some time now?

    Does anyone not realize that just about every "service" they announce has to do with data of some kind? They don't like censorship because it cuts off too much of their precious data. Do they want to see censorship go away because it's also the right thing to do? Sure, I'll give them some benefit and say yes. But think very hard before proclaiming them to be a "champion" of anything.
     
  4. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    What do you mean?
     
  5. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    What I mean is that the term "human rights", along with many other issues, such as privacy and the first amendment is no longer being used or talked about in the way they were meant. Instead, these terms are used EXTREMELY broadly so they'll fit in with and can be used to argue for legislation, public relations gains (such as in this case, imho), and as excuses to do and say whatever someone wants.

    Look, I'm not saying that censorship is a good thing, or that its even needed. After all, aren't YOU supposed to determine what you say, do and see? You were given a brain when you were born, and it doesn't require a manual or diploma to operate. What I'm saying is that for some odd reason, people have been fed this idea that they have all these "inalienable" rights. MOST of these rights exist, but are sorely misinterpreted (see the first amendment for a prime example), and some, increasingly more, actually, are somehow brought into existence overnight.

    I'm not trying to be political here, I'm simply saying that too often now people hide behind issues such as human rights, free speech and such to get their way and spiffy up their image. That's all, no more, no less. That's what I think is happening with Google. This is more about the money and image they gain than the actual issue of human rights, an issue that is entirely worthy of taking up and is not done so very often anymore for the right reasons.
     
  6. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    Perhaps it depends on your perspective. One could say much the same thing, but from a different point of view.

    To quote Ian Buruma again:
     
  7. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136
    Google is acting like a cry baby, you are bound by the laws of the land, don't like it leave, plain and simple, just don't sit there and bitch. Along with China, other countries are implementing censorship on net, Australia comes to mind, even UK is considering it. I don't see Google fretting and moaning there. Point is it ain't gonna work or does google now wish to declare war on People's Republic of China. LOL!
     
  8. NoIos

    NoIos Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Posts:
    607
    Has anybody checked Google shares these days? They're going up.

    The whole crying thing has obviously managed to hide the real thing: Google is not a world wide search engine. They're missing over 1.3 billion people (potential clients), others don't. So its value is smaller now and NASDAQ should reflect this reality. Apparently Google, share holders and new share holders have not yet understood what just happened or they are just trying to keep the waters calm for now.

    At the end everyone gets what really deserves. Chinese people do not deserve Google and Google is not qualified/does not deserve China.
     
  9. caspian

    caspian Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Posts:
    2,301
    Location:
    Oz
    Since when was freedom of speech and press a human right's issue?
     
  10. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    Prohibitions against libel or inciting a riot, etc., are not the same thing as censoring legitimate internet activities like peaceful political and religious speech.
     
  11. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    GoDaddy plans to stop China domain registrations

     
  12. NoIos

    NoIos Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Posts:
    607
    Thank you for the report.
    But seriously these US companies risk to become ridiculous. Do you think that chinese care that much if Godaddy stops providing them services? Chinese speaking web is a whole different universe and believe me it's complete.

    These companies are trying to create a negative profile for China but for reasons that do not touch the simple person that has to survive the economic crisis and real life problems. They are fooling themselves if they believe that the US government will ever do anything against China. US has tolerated from China much too heavier things. US companies should first check the US debt and read the full report. Check the word China in these reports and the numbers next to the word China. You'll get an idea.

    China has already by itself a negative profile, specially here in Europe, for economic reasons mainly but also for politic and human rights issues. Any person with a bit of culture already knows how things in China go and has already protested about many issues and on different occasions. European capitals have seen thousands of people protesting for the non respect of human rights in China, in the past. We don't need Google to tell us. We have always cared about the China's issues, Google cared only when China refused to play their game.
     
  13. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    Frankly, I think Google with it's "Don't be evil" motto looked more ridiculous when they were complicit with a large authoritarian government censoring peaceful speech on the web than they do now challenging those government rules. But that's just my opinion.
     
  14. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    It isn't at all. My comment about the first amendment was regarding my point about certain rights being misinterpreted, that particular one being the most abused by far.

    @ Dogbiscuit: You're right of course, and my opinion on that matter with Google is just that, opinion. But do look at your quoted statement from Ian again regarding image gain and the benefit of being on the side of angels. He pretty much said exactly what I did, it's about business (usually, as always there are exceptions. Some companies actually do care quite a lot about freedom and rights).
     
  15. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    Yes. Understood.
     
  16. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    AP test of Google offers peek at China Net filters
     
  17. chronomatic

    chronomatic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2009
    Posts:
    1,343
    Who is misinterpreting the first amendment and how?
     
  18. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    I was merely commenting that issues such as the amendment and humans rights are often used to further a personal cause (whether that be financial gain, making excuses to do and say things, that sort of thing), rather than benefit people as a whole. I only was trying to state that Google is likely, like so many others hiding behind the cause of human rights to benefit themselves rather than the people they claim to be defending. The same thing is done with other causes such as free speech. I didn't mean to derail the topic.
     
  19. zcv

    zcv Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Posts:
    355
    Hi dw426,

    Throughout history, individuals - nations - religions - etc, have done the right thing for the "wrongs" reasons, so nothing new here; in the end it's the actions that count in the long run.

    Bottom line, do you think that Google did the "right" thing?

    As for comparing Australia - UK plans for some censorship and Google's potential hypocrisy as one poster did, point taken, but can anyone say that the Chinese people have anywhere near the say in what their government does as opposed to the Brits and Australians who can debate the issue and in the end do have a say.
     
  20. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    As far as the "right" thing, when you consider the plight of the Chinese people, sure, they did the "right" thing. And I completely get your point about countless others doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. I just am disappointed that Google, after being under fire for various reasons just now decides they're taking up the cause. If they truly believed in it, why not long before now? Why just a couple of months after China handed them their behinds on a silver platter via cyber-attack? That firewall in China has been there a long time, if Google wanted to prove a point, why not 6 months ago, a year, longer?

    Yes, it's the "right" thing to do, but, in my eyes, it's a face-saving measure, nothing more, perhaps mixed with a little revenge. While they are busy doing the "right thing", how about knock off creating services for the sole purpose of accessing more data for their hoard? How about getting off the "Do No Evil" motto that hasn't meant a thing in years? How about not censoring results in the U.S, the U.K, and various other countries. (and yes, if you poke around enough, they do "omit" results)? Isn't what's good for China good for the rest of us as well?
     
  21. zcv

    zcv Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Posts:
    355
    Ok, that got lost in your displeasure with Google :)

    And I agree generally with your descriptions of Google.
     
  22. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136

    Who decides what is legitimate and religion is a powder keg and when it begins to threaten the very sovereignty of the nation, counter moves are taken. In guise and name of religion and religious freedom, plenty of harm has already been done, I don't think China or the world needs anymore of that.
     
  23. Dogbiscuit

    Dogbiscuit Guest

    If you believe in censoring peaceful religious speech, then that's your perogative.
     
  24. linuxforall

    linuxforall Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2010
    Posts:
    2,136

    Religion is never peaceful, its sectarian by nature and always based on the fact that their own is superior over all others, its part of the fallacy of human nature and therefore it needs to be curtailed. No matter what or where, religion like politics always carries an agenda and sometimes the former is far more powerful than the later in inciting humans to a particular mode of thinking and action.
     
  25. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    Okay guys, let's not get this thread closed. I was making a point about Google furthering their own cause by using the human rights card, not trying to stir up a religious debate which has nothing to do with the subject. I suppose I opened the door by commenting on the first amendment, but let's close that door, shall we?
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.