Slashdot Mirror


Assange: Google Is Not What It Seems

oxide7 (1013325) writes "In June 2011, Julian Assange received an unusual visitor: the chairman of Google, Eric Schmidt. They outlined radically opposing perspectives: for Assange, the liberating power of the Internet is based on its freedom and statelessness. For Schmidt, emancipation is at one with U.S. foreign policy objectives and is driven by connecting non-Western countries to Western companies and markets. These differences embodied a tug-of-war over the Internet's future that has only gathered force subsequently. Assange describes his encounter with Schmidt and how he came to conclude that it was far from an innocent exchange of views."

11 of 289 comments (clear)

  1. Goolge is helping... by blahplusplus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... compiling dossiers on everyone. Since in order to use the internet you need to use a search engine, a good idea is to look at you chrome browser history and note the title, time, where you visited, is there, then combine this with analytics and cookies (machine identification) remember this is the kind of shit and more they got behind closed doors. This will be used to pro-actively deny employment to people and 'screen' people for their political views/sites/news they visit/any health problems/etc. i.e. it allows corporations unprecedented insight into the flaws of our evolved nervous system and minds. We are not "free" in any way or form our minds were shaped by evolution and they have a lot of problems reasoning or perceiving reality, if in doubt see here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    They are trying to map political dissident to pre-emptively strike against political change using science and big data they are fervently trying to figure out how to regain their control, since they know media's days are numbered with newer generations. So they are learning techniques in controlling populations and manipulating public opinion on social media, to socially engineer how people think, etc. The reality is america has been the greatest success in propaganda in human history, most americans were hyper capitalist, virulently anti-communist for the last few decades and the upper class would like the working classes to keep voting against their own interests to keep their ill gotten wealth. So if you vote for D&R you are one of the illusioned and the elites aren't worried about you at all because you are politically illiterate just like they want. They want you all to vote democrats and republicans so as not to rock the boat. They don't want political change to manifest outside the political system (aka threat to corporate power).

    This (mass surveillance) is just more part and parcel of state suppression of dissent against corporate interests. They're worried that the more people are going to wake up and corporate centers like the US and canada may be among those who also awaken. See this vid with Zbigniew Brzezinski, former United States National Security Advisor.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Look at the following graphs:

    http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesa...
    http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesa...
    http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesa...

    And then...

    WIKILEAKS: U.S. Fought To Lower Minimum Wage In Haiti So Hanes And Levis Would Stay Cheap

    http://www.businessinsider.com...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Free markets?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    http://www.amazon.com/Empire-I...

    "We now live in two Americas. One—now the minority—functions in a print-based, literate world that can cope with complexity and can separate illusion from truth. The other—the majority—is retreating from a reality-based world into one of false certainty and magic. To this majority—which crosses social class lines, though the poor are overwhelmingly affected—presidential debate and political rhetoric is pitched at a sixth-grade reading level. In this “other America,” serious film and theater, as well as newspapers and books, are being pushed to the margins of society.

    In the tradition of Chr

  2. Re:Oh yeah, that guy by NewtonsLaw · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Well if you'd been holed-up in a small room for years under the threat of extradition (ulitmately) to some US holiday camp where waterboarding is considered a social activity, wouldn't your outlooks and perceptions have been somewhat altered by the experience?

    Let's not forget that Assange, through his Wikileaks disclosures, has done a hell of a lot to wake the people of the world up to the nastiness of those who forget they are in the public service and instead believe they are rulers and demigods by right.

    While Assange is open to criticism on many fronts, never forget that he *has* done a lot to help preserve what few freedoms we still have.

    I more strongly criticise those who see the wrongs that have been done and do nothing to right them. That's the *vast* majority of the great unwashed out there.

  3. His main points by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Informative

    His main points, as I understand them:

    1) Eric Schmidt is getting involved in politics, and is becoming influential.
    2) Google doesn't always follow "do no evil" but fanboys love Google anyway
    3) Google is getting involved in government more than is healthy.

    He has some other rambles about the Bilderbergs, and how the governments are secretly controlling world events, but his main points seam reasonable enough.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:His main points by steelfood · · Score: 5, Interesting

      His main point is that we should more cautious of Google than we currently are. This is based on the idea that every company, after a certain point, will begin manipulating the government for continued dominance and the ability to expand to new markets, Google being no exception. He backs this assertion using Eric Schmidt's close ties to Washington which is a bit shaky, but the premise is historically accurate.

      He occasionally goes into a bit too much hyperbole and too deep rhetoric, but some of the links between Google and the U.S. government he mentions to reinforce his point are unexpected and interesting nevertheless. For example, the fact that Google was supplying the NSA with search technology to sift through the collected data is news to me, and a bit alarming at that. That they're collaborating technologically with the shadier parts of the U.S. government in search, and others like maps, is not surprising, but still a little disappointing.

      The big thing that's not mentioned in the piece is Google sharing the data they've collected using their consumer-facing products with the U.S. government. Now that would be a bombshell. That's not the assertion here, but Assange does drop hints that even if it's not happening currently, it's bound to happen soon enough.

      In any case, I think we should be wary of Google, both because of the power they wield over information on the internet, and because they continue to insist they are doing "no evil." Unlike Assange though, in the same way that George Washington set a precedent by stepping down after two terms as President (he could very well have crowned himself if he wanted), I'm waiting to see if Larry Page's Google will set a precedent before I pass final judgment on Google's corporate existence. But that doesn't mean I won't continue to be suspicious of Google's activities in the meantime either.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
  4. When you are inside the box ... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I am from China. Assange is from Australia. Those of us who are not from the United States of America tend to have an advantage over those who were born and raised inside America because we were not indoctrinated with the Pledge of Allegiance throughout our childhood (into the teen years) but the Americans do

    That is why when Assange said

    For a man of systematic intelligence, Schmidtâ(TM)s politicsâ"such as I could hear from our discussionâ"were surprisingly conventional, even banal

    I have to agree

    Schmidt, no matter how smart he is, chooses to remain inside the box, and as one who stays inside the box can't see how bad the system that governs America has turned into

    America used to be the one who fight for liberty. That was why I left China and went to America decades ago. Now? America is as bad as China in term of the suppression of liberty

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:When you are inside the box ... by steelfood · · Score: 5, Insightful

      America used to be the one who fight for liberty.

      Nah, that was just PR for the masses. You weren't around for the internment camps during WWII or the McCarthy witch trials, but you should've been around for the CIA's involvement in South America and Iran.

      America stands as much for liberty and freedom as China stands for money. Liberty and freedom are convenient lines to trot out to the masses when the government wants to take some otherwise unpopular action (just like money is convenient to keep the masses quiet, but all over the world, not just China). The real motivation behind America is imperial power via trade. Unlike the first and second ages of imperialism, the people in power in the U.S. realize you don't have to own the land, you just have to control what the land produces.

      Sorry to burst your bubble. Outside looking in can be as limiting as inside looking out. It's best to have both perspectives.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    2. Re:When you are inside the box ... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You acting superior because you're from somewhere else is equivalent to an American acting superior because he's an American.

      It's not about acting superior, it's about being able to see the system with clarity.

      People who work within a system for their whole lives adapt themselves to it, and either find workarounds for aspects that restrict them or learn to conform to the restrictions. If they don't, they don't thrive or sometimes even survive. Someone coming from outside, from a culture with different (though sometimes overlapping restrictions) will feel those constraints more strongly, as they haven't adapted so closely to them.

      So for an Australian (like me or Assange), or a Chinese (like Taco), the American socio-political constraints are clearer, and the flaws more glaring, not because we're better, but because we've grown up outside them.

      TLDR: Sometimes it's easier to see things from the outside.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  5. Re:Oh yeah, that guy by the_other_chewey · · Score: 5, Informative

    He's not in England. He's in Ecuador.

    No he isn't. He is in the Ecuadorian embassy, in London, England.

    The embassy is their sovereign soil, by international treaty.

    No it isn't.

    Contrary to popular belief, diplomatic missions do not enjoy full extraterritorial status and are not sovereign territory of the represented state.

    If the English police set foot in there to deport him to Sweden (as they would do if he left), that's an invastion of their territory.

    No it isn't.
    It would break a very important international treaty though, and likely
    lead to lots of diplomatic problems.

  6. Re:Oh yeah, that guy by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No shit shirlock. But why do you think he's hiding there? Avoiding extradition to the US has nothing to do with it.

    Avoiding extradition to the US has everything to do with Assange hiding in the Ecuador embassy. Swedish prisons aren't the hell holes in the US or Australia. Even if Assange had an irrational fear of being labelled a sex offender felon, it would not outweigh the price he is paying being holed up in the Ecuador embassy.

    Its all about not going to a country that will extradite him to the US over a trumped up security issue. Assange does not have the legal rights an American citizen has. He can be put into Guantanamo, or any other black ops prison, because the US does not respect universal notions of due process. If the US did, Guantanamo couldn't exist.

    --
    There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  7. Re:Oh yeah, that guy by slashdot_commentator · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1) Your assurances are meaningless.

    2) Look at what happened to Kevin Mitnick. Because the American public had such a poor understanding of hacking and the level of threat posed by hacking, people though Mitnick had to be placed behind bars to keep America (corporations) safe. Because the American legal system is much more complex and byzantine than the simplified mythology propagated to its citizens, Kevin had to spend many years in a medium security jail before even going to trial, to optimize his chances of either beating the conviction, or reducing the maximum penalty. What actually happened was that the technology moved so fast, and the public's miniscule understanding of hacking was modified ("Why worry about some jerk that went on a computer joyride, when hackers are stealing American intellectual property and money from the safety of Russia or China"), it eventually became cost effective for the US DOJ to deescalate the witchhunt they were making over Mitnick.

    The point being that as long as organizations exist to reveal information the US government prefers to conceal, the security apparatus of the US will treat those organizations as national security threats. This even sort of includes legitimate news organizations like the NY Times, UK Guardian, etc. They are captive to the US government. As long as they operate within the laws defined by the judicial branch, and "play ball", they aren't going to get the Assange treatment. No one like Assange or Snowden can assume they are beyond the reach or interest of the US government.

    --
    There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
  8. Re:Oh yeah, that guy by quenda · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm still lost on why Sweden, of all places, is more likely to deport Assange to the US than England is.

    Why else are they going to such extraordinary lengths to obtain him? There are no charges, and Sweden refuses to question him in the UK.
    The UK is spending millions of pounds on a case where even the allegations do not add up to anything that would be a crime in the UK.

    If you think Assange has no cause for fear, read this:

    In December 2001 Swedish police ... two Egyptians who had been seeking asylum in Sweden. The police took them to Bromma airport in Stockholm, and then stood aside as masked alleged CIA operatives cut their clothes from their bodies, inserted drugged suppositories in their anuses, and dressed them in diapers and overalls, handcuffed and chained them and put them on an executive jet with American registration N379P. They were flown to Egypt, where they were imprisoned, beaten, and tortured

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...