Slashdot Mirror
Senior Google Scientist Resigns Over 'Forfeiture of Our Values' in China (theintercept.com)
A senior Google research scientist has quit the company in protest over its plan to launch a censored version of its search engine in China. The Intercept: Jack Poulson worked for Google's research and machine intelligence department, where he was focused on improving the accuracy of the company's search systems. In early August, Poulson raised concerns with his managers at Google after The Intercept revealed that the internet giant was secretly developing a Chinese search app for Android devices. The search system, code-named Dragonfly, was designed to remove content that China's authoritarian government views as sensitive, such as information about political dissidents, free speech, democracy, human rights, and peaceful protest. After entering into discussions with his bosses, Poulson decided in mid-August that he could no longer work for Google. He tendered his resignation and his last day at the company was August 31. He told The Intercept in an interview that he believes he is one of about five of the company's employees to resign over Dragonfly. He felt it was his "ethical responsibility to resign in protest of the forfeiture of our public human rights commitments," he said.
I have quit jobs that I felt has turned me into a bad person, and I would look in the mirror and realized I wasn't happy with what I had became.
Sure we all have jobs that we may not like or disagree with, but if you have a moral objection to it, you should quit your job. If you are Senior Data scientist, Google may have a harder time replacing your job. But I am sure they will find someone to fill the gap. But the thing is, we can't always change the world, but at least we can feel good about our current place in it.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
You people can imagine something like this in the Steve Jobs company? And in Microsoft or IBM? How this companies would handle this?
Google works with the NSA to spy on everyone in the US and most of the rest of the world too.
Google is not your friend.
It is a monster.
For some of us this is already apparent.
The tech world are not all that into free speech anymore, specially not those coming out of Silicon Valley. ;)
L'Idiot
This is a shocking turnaround for Google. They were so benevolent before this whole China thing.
Unfortunately, many people will be willing to take his place.
Wait until Google starts censoring what can be seen and said in the West to satisfy their capitalist greed for the next dollar. Maybe it is happening right now. If their Communist masters are not turning the screws on Google now, they will. Don't doubt it.
E Proelio Veritas.
Do not be evil.... unless it makes lots of money. So, be evil almost always.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Same in Europe, where you can no longer post anything that may possibly be copyrighted.
Resignation is far more ethical then sabotage.
Sabotaging a project, may not have desired effect, and you could make the situation worse. Especially with this Google/China relationship. China has very fragile forces trying to gain more free speech and uncensored ideas. Getting a Censored Google is a small step in that direction, if the project has been sabotaged it could push the group in power favoring a closed system to push back twice as hard.
The standard tyrant debate.
The peasants are not happy and are about to revolt.
The Tyrant Raise the food rations.
The peasants still revolt
the Tyrant will stop all the food rations and send the military to stop the revolt. Because they did the good faith effort, and didn't get anything back. So they this group of people is obviously not rational thus needs to be stopped at all cost.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
And that's being unprofitable in a huge country like China.
If I were to take a contrarian view of this, I would ask: "What is the difference between Google censoring search results based on the public security laws of China, versus Google censoring search results based on the copyright laws of the USA and EU?"
Why didn't this researcher resign over the 2nd instance?
It seems pretty ripe to claim Google is forfeiting values in China, when it's applying the very same values of control over the populace in the U.S. by removing many kinds of YouTube videos it does not like, either for content or ideology.
If you are removing content based on ideology, you have no reason to claim any moral high ground over China.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Google's always had a cozy relationship with the Deep State, and has been helping the Pentagon develop software for drones used to blow up people that have never done a thing to the United States, in countries where war has not been declared. But the straw the breaks the camel's back for this guy, is giving the Chinese government a fraction of the capability enjoyed by the CIA/NSA/FBI?
And please, nobody come in with the line that Google's code is to make drones more accurate so they kill fewer innocent bystanders, only the targets of the strike (who are almost always innocent themselves). The U.S. military couldn't give the tiniest, greenest little shit about civilian deaths - like when it spent hours bombing a MSF hospital that it knew was a hospital, and went on bombing it as doctors were furiously calling to say they were bombing a hospital. That terror attack was carried out with a gunship, but drones have been used to carry out "double tap" strikes against survivors or first responders to the first drone strike, which is also terrorism.
That's some Tyrant you have there.
The people have a problem, he addresses it, they go into revolt creating new problems, He addresses the new problems.
The stop all food rations is of course a straw man. If he wanted to practice genocide, pre-emptive strike prior to their being an organized armed resistance is the way to go.
There was a war over personal computing and it has been lost by the good guys. Now people around the world are starting to [bbc.co.uk] pay for it. [theguardian.com]
Ehh decentralization and a peer to peer web are still possible. They just haven't been very desirable. The more evil the giants get the better they look.
oh wait.... that doesn't apply anymore.
Do the right thing. There... way more open to interpretation.
Carry on.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Google Search is already censored worldwide: torrents, EU's "right to be forgotten", DMCA, copyright filters, etc. It's a matter of degree, not of substance. I find much more concerning whether the Chinese Government will use Google Search for surveillance.
Who to root for?
On the one hand, China clearly does not derive from Europeans, so they must be good. OTOH, they clearly do some not so good things ...
And Google has to be good for being on the "right" side of so many issues and "nudging" people in the progressive direction, yet here they are willing to sell their souls for money in China, which is bad ...
Enough to make one's head hurt.
The point is if you are in a bad situation when a mediocre fig leaf is given. Running like nothing was given without any sort of compromise even short term, could bite back harshly. Especially if you are not dealing with a good guy, who has a lot of power.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
True, but they were Living under a Tyrant and Starving. They have just move to living under a Tyrant. This token olive branch would at least bring in a token response back. Say by not revolting for a few months, seeing if you can open a dialog. In general showing if he gives something he will get something back, this will increase the chance of him giving again. However an insult will just be a harsh attack back.
I am not saying revolting is wrong, or the tyrant is in the right. However there are consequences to such actions which may be hard to determine. Where ethically just leaving may be the better choice.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Geez, it's raining ACs today :)
read the word "real life"
I don't blame the guy at all for doing that. Google once had a motto of "don't be evil", but they left that behind a long time ago in favor of "profit over all".
Sometimes you have to lead by example and make damned sure that people know you're doing it. If enough key people leave Google then maybe they'll get the idea that the direction they're going is wrong and counterproductive in the long term.
Or not (as a VERY small number of people have chosen to do) - everybody has their price, and he clearly wasn't offered enough.
Not everyone has their price. Although that has more to do with what other options a person has access to. I make good money in a career I enjoy, so even an extra $100k in salary wouldn't get me to do a job I hate or that I'm morally opposed to. But if I was making minimum wage, I would likely take a job I was morally opposed to for a $100k raise. Once you're high enough on Maslow's hierarchy of basic needs, it takes for less sacrifice to do what you consider to be the right thing.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
Tiananmen Square showed the Chinese government are filth that needs to be cleansed from our world.
For the vast majority of the human species. . . . Wealth will always trump Morals / Ethics
Early on, Google had delusions about doing the right thing, but money corrupts everything it touches and you see where Google is today.
Imagine where they will be tomorrow :|
Secret program gives NSA, FBI backdoor access to Apple, Google, Facebook, Microsoft data
That article came out five years ago - and was about a five year old program. Google has been in bed with these guys for a loooong time.
Your fascist butthurt in response to facts is noted.
The linked article - and the sections you quoted - literally has absolutely nothing to do with the steam of nonsense you originally posted. But your kneejerk desire to call everyone "fascist" certainly reinforces the accuracy of my original assessment ...
See subject "APK" (fake name do-nothing nobody): You're a "ne'er-do-well" chatterbox (all talk & no work BETTER than mine) & you proved it.
APK
P.S.=> Don't take "potshots" @ your BETTERS like me you CHUMP (& I can say that since you ARE obviously a NOBODY chump do-nothing vs. me)... apk
Being a white male, possibly even straight (gasp), his career at google would have been limited anyways.
IMO, Google would have higher moral by censoring in China than it does by censoring in America.
In China, censorship is the law. The Chinese people chose their leaders and they approved censorship law. People's representatives also decide what should be censored and they have voluntary armies of people working on censorship. They also have the legislative means (although difficult) to change that (censorship or what should be censored). That's not to say it is democratic, as the representation of minorities and of opposing views is part of true democracy, but censoring in China would mean abiding by the rules and the prevailing morals of the people (over there), pushing the interests of their representatives (not the people's interests IMO).
In the US, when google censors or apply "the very same values of control over the populace", they are doing so to favor the interests of a very small minority, in opposition to the country's claimed values. They hide behind the flag of freedom (freedom to not make business) to effectively censor opposing views ("censorship is not illegal if it's not the government") and control the population to push policies and world views they want. I don't know how people in the US could have any say on what they will censor or stop private censorship.
I not only agree that they are not forfeiting any values in China, but also think that the shit they are pulling in the US should be cause for much more alarm, concern and response.
Decided to log in cause my previous AC comments have disappeared.
The Chinese people chose their leaders and they approved censorship law.
That seems wrong...
However I agree with your overall point and sub-points otherwise. I can't fault companies for doing business respecting the laws of countries they can operate in, as you say where I have an issue is with trying to impose the will of a tiny minority over free countries.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Not everyone has their price. Although that has more to do with what other options a person has access to. I make good money in a career I enjoy, so even an extra $100k in salary wouldn't get me to do a job I hate or that I'm morally opposed to. But if I was making minimum wage, I would likely take a job I was morally opposed to for a $100k raise. Once you're high enough on Maslow's hierarchy of basic needs, it takes for less sacrifice to do what you consider to be the right thing.
I'd agree with this. Something about the marginal value of money mumble mumble.
While there are aways some people who will do anything for money, it makes it an awful lot easier to do anything if not doing so involves not eating or making rent. I think that's a good argument for raising the standard of living for the poorest.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
While there are aways some people who will do anything for money, it makes it an awful lot easier to do anything if not doing so involves not eating or making rent. I think that's a good argument for raising the standard of living for the poorest.
TPTB can't permit that for the same reason they can't permit a working education system... their dominance won't survive it.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"