Sergey Brin On Google and China
yuhong writes "The NY Times has an interview with Sergey Brin on Google and China. A few quotes from it: 'Mr. Brin lived in the Soviet Union until he was nearly 6 years old, and he said the experience of living under a totalitarian system that censored political speech influenced his thinking — and Google's policy. "It has definitely shaped my views, and some of my company's views," he said.' Yes, business is personal, especially these days."
Good on Sergey & Google. To those clods who will joke about how a six year old can be influenced let me just say I remember when the Berlin Wall was erected. I was six years old and although I don't remember the political details I vividly recall seeing a front page photo in the Detroit News that showed what Woodward Avenue (the main street in downtown Detroit) would look like if the Wall had been built right down the center. It scared the crap out of me then even without knowing why and it remains an image that has stayed with me. Of *course* Sergey was affected.
As someone who lived in Soviet Union until it's collapse in 92 (I was 25) I can tell you that fear was not a fact of everyday life. Generally you didn't feel much more under control than in US. You couldn't say certain negative things about Party and government in public, but in private conversations everything was discussed freely. It is the same as in states- try to voice politically incorrect opinions about race in your place of work, and you will see how "freedom of speech" will protect you. We have more freedom in US as compared to USSR or China, but don't overestimate it.
Why did Google initially agree to censor search results in the first place if this was their philosophy?
Because Google isn't a monolithic entity with a singular set of unified values? Instead, it's an organization of individuals, with varying viewpoints, and those individuals will wield different levels of power at different times.
In this particular case, my money is on Schmidt and the board overriding Larry and Sergei on the censorship issue based on the obvious business case of moving into China. Plus, they may have been able to rationalize the move by telling themselves that they might be able to do some good in the country by operating there (many people who criticize Google for threatening to leave China do so based on precisely this principle).
But now that there's an obvious business reason *not* to operate in China (the threat of being hacked by individuals whose actions may or may not have been sanctioned by the government), Larry and Sergei find themselves in the position to steer Google, the organization, in a different direction.
At least, that's my read of the situation. But I'm obviously biased, in that I don't start off with the supposition that Google is a fundamentally evil, heartless, money-grubbing mega-corporation that's willing to do anything for a buck, as so many around here seem to think.
It sounds like you need to do some more shopping around between subcultures. Maybe it's because I spent a lot of time in college towns or because I grew up in Northern California, but I'm used to seeing two things that contradict your claims.
I am in Berkeley [, you insensitive clod!] That's probably the closest -- and yet way, way outside of what actually would be acceptable.
1) People from radically different cultures who moved to the United States and feel they're more able to practice their own culture here than back in India, China, Indonesia, etc., because in their homeland they were part of an offshoot culture than was frowned upon, while in their new homes that's absolutely welcomed.
Only if their culture is fringe at home, and is still fringe here -- except only at home they are taken seriously, so people don't bother to express direct hostility toward them in US. Those people who believe that they "practice their own culture" in US are deluding themselves -- their lives only exist in context of American society that follows rules and system of values that is specific to US. They can "practice their own culture" as a hobby or (and usually only) as a religious cult that no one cares about -- this is not "culture", this is thin veneer of a culture over their entirely American lives. Yes, that includes how Russian culture "exists" in US -- forgive me, I forgot to bring my knife, thick accent, bottle of vodka and two liters of sweat. I don't want this and would be insulted to reduce my cultural background to such a freak show.
2) People from the United States who hold very different values from the prevailing national/regional/local views, who are quite happy with their freedom to be different. I've also lived places in the U.S. where that's not the case, but usually that's been my experience.
American society is actually very much homogenized. Differences are superficial and mostly based on racial diversity, and racism that keeps people of the same race together, thus forming a "subculture" with no unique values. For example, if you look at Black/African American culture (that formed entirely over the history of US) it's clear that there are plenty of superficial differences but at its core it's exactly the same as culture of, say, white Protestants, except adapted to being discriminated against, and developed in relatively closed communities. For white American, especially one who adopted racial stereotype it looks "different" or even hostile, but most goals, values and ideas are exactly the same. Many other subcultures have the same fundamental nature, even if not based on ethnicity.
What bothers me most, American geek/nerd subculture, that I am supposed to be associated with, is still very close to mainstream, however mainstream treats it with such a ferocious hostility, I can never understand such a situation. For me American society looks like this Star Trek episode -- groups that I can barely recognize as different treat each other as complete opposites of themselves, and they don't realize just how far I am from all of them.
There's a lot of room here for vegans, people who hate television, people who are only interested in Chinese music, people who want to have no friends, people who never want to be alone,
Vegans? Hate television? That's not what a culture is about.
socialists, anarchists, conservatives, libertarians,
There are no "socialists" in US. American "socialist" would be welcome in the second-from-the right party anywhere else in the world -- and it's usually only second from the right because first would be basically Nazi. In USSR Communists wouldn't recognize him as belonging to a related movement. Politics is one of the area where only a very narrow range of opinion is tolerated in serious public discourse. "Libert
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.