Slashdot Mirror
Behind Google's Recent Decision About China
yuhong writes "This article by The Independent takes a look at what is behind the recent decisions made by Google regarding China, particularly regarding Sergey Brin, born in the USSR, [and whose origins] played a big part in this decision. From the article: 'He's always had an emotional tug within him, saying "we shouldn't be making compromises," says Ken Auletta, the author of Googled: The End of the World As We Know It.'"
Well, even after "cashing out", they'll still control 48% of the voting rights, so it would have to be a unanimous vote against them, with nobody abstaining. That's unlikely.
Interesting, Sergey's father faced the problem of having to compromise by abandoning his faith and culture in order to get the job he wanted (astronomer) or stay Jewish and be reduced/stunted in a select set of careers.
Actually, no. In the USSR, if you were Jewish, this was written in your passport and in no way a choice. Almost certainly Sergey's father was a secular Jew.
I have the same background as Sergey (Jewish parents left USSR when I was little) and I can see precisely where he is coming from. It's scary to read all of the comments from people who have never lived under an actual oppressive government about how the US is just as bad as China, echoing the Chinese government that we shouldn't censure China for murdering dissidents and blocking large parts of the internet because we've conducted warrantless wiretapping.
cajones = drawers, cojones = the word you wanted to use.
Um no,
China owns 23.35% of the foreign dept of the US (JA is next w/ 21.13%), foreign dept is 27.90% of the total public dept.
Giving China a grand total of 6.51% of the total dept of the US
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt
They didn't cash in - from what I understand, they filed a notice with the SEC (per one of the Insider Trading Sanctions Acts), just in case if they want to cash in a larger part of their securities.
That said, yes, Brin seems a nice guy through and through
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
While China's overall GDP growth numbers have looked good, especially relative to other top economies, there are some underlying structural issues hidden by these numbers. In one case, I don't think they take into account the environmental sacrifices that have been made to pull their economy forward and this will be due at some point (recent green efforts, notwithstanding).
A recent BBC broadcast (link below), highlighted some of the issues related to China's growth. The guest was Jim Chanos, an investor known for his perceptiveness in shorting industries. He noted that much of their growth was asset based (plant building, etc) and as a percentage of GDP rather large. This had been going on for some time (essentially funded by State capital) and the depreciation of said assets is not taken into account when calculating their GDP. GDP in China is a goal, not one of many descriptions normally used for observing overall growth. This can affect planning, especially for an economy with so much central planning, as they target growth just to make GDP grow. Thus you get an imbalance in short term gain versus long term development.
China Crisis (BBC podcast)
http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/worldservice/bizdaily/bizdaily_20100127-1026a.mp3