Slashdot Mirror
Google CEO Tells Senators That Censored Chinese Search Engine Could Provide 'Broad Benefits' (theintercept.com)
Google CEO Sundar Pichai has refused to answer a list of questions from U.S. lawmakers about the company's secretive plan for a censored search engine in China. From a report: In a letter newly obtained by The Intercept, Pichai told a bipartisan group of six senators that Google could have "broad benefits inside and outside of China," but said he could not share details about the censored search engine because it "remains unclear" whether the company "would or could release a search service" in the country. Pichai's letter contradicts the company's search engine chief, Ben Gomes, who informed staff during a private meeting that the company was aiming to release the platform in China between January and April 2019. Gomes told employees working on the Chinese search engine that they should get it ready to be "brought off the shelf and quickly deployed."
[...] In his letter to the senators, dated August 31, Pichai did not mention the word "censorship" or address human rights concerns. He told the senators that "providing access to information to people around the world is central to our mission," and said he believed Google's tools could "help to facilitate an exchange of information and learning." The company was committed to "promoting access to information, freedom of expression, and user privacy," he wrote, while also "respecting the laws of jurisdictions in which we operate."
[...] In his letter to the senators, dated August 31, Pichai did not mention the word "censorship" or address human rights concerns. He told the senators that "providing access to information to people around the world is central to our mission," and said he believed Google's tools could "help to facilitate an exchange of information and learning." The company was committed to "promoting access to information, freedom of expression, and user privacy," he wrote, while also "respecting the laws of jurisdictions in which we operate."
They've forgotten the 'Don't'.
I'll get us used to the idea that censorship is acceptable and good for society. *sarcasm*
In his letter to the senators, dated August 31, Pichai did not mention the word "censorship" or address human rights concerns.
Yeah, they try to talk around what they do in the US too, always using a euphemism like "filtering" instead.
AKA we will get more money for releasing this
We like money.
And nothing else.
http://progressquest.com/spoltog.php?name=Son+Of+Son+Of+DarkRookie
What's the matter with Page and Brin? Do they worship Mammon that devotedly? Don't they care that Google (Alphabet) is rapidly becoming one of the most hated companies ever? Don't they care about reaching the levels of despicability of Microsoft and Apple?
What's your new motto - Be as Obnoxious as Possible?
Here is the money quote:
In individuals this behavior is known as pathological lying.
Google isn't considering selling the censorship technology. Logically, any google search product can only add (however slightly) to the pool of information available to people in China. What's the sense of refusing to provide any information on the basis that they're not allowed to provide certain additional information? They already thoroughly tested whether packing up their bag and leaving would pressure China into changing laws -- it didn't.
This space intentionally left blank
Funny how if someone conspires to murder someone it's conspiracy to murder, but if someone conspires to fuck entire nations and commit awful warcrimes as a direct result it's just called business.
alphabets bottom line. For the people behind this search engine, not so much.
I guess the next step is proving "alternative revisionist history" where legitimate search requests are redirected to "the party line" search responses. No tank guy, no Chinese purge results, no Free Tibet, no criticism of any government official.
And of course the natural response of more donations of fertilizer and organs, and more expensive use of bullets in response to "Bad Queries" categorized and reported...
Rationalizing like the damned (that they are)
Just. Wow, Google. You're up there in the Big Leagues now, Google, right alongside R.J. Reynolds, Monsanto, and Mylan.
You have to admit, it's an impressive amount of internal mental hacking necessary to compartmentalize your own ethics, morals, and values, so you can reap as much profit as possible, regardless of the consequences to everyone else. I can't imagine being able to do that. I will admit that I've thought more than once that the only thing standing between me and being wealthy, is this pesky 'conscience' I've got. Well done, Google, well done.
</extreme_sarcasm>
(included for the clueless who don't understand)
What's the sense of refusing to provide any information on the basis that they're not allowed to provide certain additional information?
Moral principles where you don't help in the oppression of people just to make a buck?
I don't live in California, so all I've got is what I read in both mainstream and not-so-mainstream media, but it looks for all the world like they think they're some sort of gods out there and that the same rules don't apply to all Americans don't apply to them. That's sad. I know some people who have worked for Google or are still there and have risen up through the ranks, and I know they're individually good people...but wow. Brazenly lying to the United States Government in the face of evidence to the contrary...and not just about (for lack of a better word) silly things like money and accounting tricks, but about real fundamental mom-and-apply-pie stuff like freedom of speech and freedom of thought. That's awful. And it is the result of hubris.
qmap.pub --it's all in there, check it out...
When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
I wouldn't be so quick to jump to that conclusion. Wouldn't getting more useful results for the 99.99% of non-censored web searches provide broad benefits to the Chinese people even if that .01% remains censored?
For that matter, given that every company is likely to implement censorship differently, wouldn't having more search engines (even censored ones) slowly erode the effectiveness of censorship by letting different things leak through?
Food for thought. This isn't an easy issue, and it isn't black-and-white. Anybody who tries to paint it that way is likely trying to gather votes.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
And it is because of people like you that such things happen in the first place. This reminds me of a certain English professor, who shall remain nameless. He was the archetypical example of the lefty professor - long hair, beard, hippy appearance, sandals, anti-nuclear ... You name, he was it. However, his research was supported, to large extent, by the military. His justification? The military were going to throw away their money anyhow, they might just as well throw it away at him. This was tongue in cheek - but he kept getting money from the military.
Of course. The benefits are to Google's bottom line not the people of China.
The benefits are to Google's employee political ideology too. They can censor all that "offensive" stuff in the US too, help ensure that the "correct" people are elected to office.
Seriously, we already have internal emails where they propose and/or try to do this. Won't having this new censorship technology facilitate such desires?
It's more than a list of limits on the government. It's a list of some of our inalienable rights as men.
Google isn't considering selling the censorship technology. Logically, any google search product can only add (however slightly) to the pool of information available to people in China. What's the sense of refusing to provide any information on the basis that they're not allowed to provide certain additional information? They already thoroughly tested whether packing up their bag and leaving would pressure China into changing laws -- it didn't.
Censorship is a red herring that Google and China hope the world focuses on. Censorship by Google in China is just a distraction, and as Google and friends would point out, any little bit of any information served up by Google technically constitutes breaking the technical censorship that Google's absence from the Chinese market represents. That such an argument makes sense to some people is literally quite perverse.
Surveillance and collaborating with Chinese authorities to identify "undesirable" people is the problem. Google is being allowed to trade ratting out people in exchange for money. That the Chinese government gets to see Google squirm with PR issues in the US is just icing on the cake.
Yes, sometimes one sacrfices things to not help dictatorial regimes. The Chinese government is not gonna change because wants it to. Google needs the Chinese, the Chinese government has zero need for Google.
Even putting aside the moral questions, how have American firms not learned from others experience. It is likely that if Google sets up shop in China, their IP and trade technologies will be ripped off, and they will be shown the exit as a native Chinese firm takes their place. I get that China is a huge market, but the gamble doesn't seem worth it. Safer to invest elsewhere.
Working with a Communist party is not good for freedom, the pursuit of happiness.
Removing words, banning search terms and reporting users to Communists is not the way to grow a brand.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
"Aw, fuck it, let's be evil."
At the end of the day, the Chinese government will either pay Google to develop it or Alibaba or Tencent to develop it. This way, Google has a foot in the door.
I don't see it as compromising values at all. Google cannot participate in the issues in China in any way if they have no presence. Some presence brings them into the game, even if the rules are different.
Google could act as a contract spy agency for the CIA inside of China? Take a play from China's playbook ....
"We're not evil.... Oh, wait, we are now!"
Beware of Sales Reps bearing gifts.
I can't wait for everything, everywhere to be censored as hate speech. Ahhh the silence...
It's true. Google has very little experience with releasing search engines. We should totally believe him.
... and they will be shown the exit as a native Chinese firm takes their place.
Huh?
Baidu has the 2nd largest search engine in the world, and held a 76.05% market share in China's search engine market.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Surveillance and collaborating with Chinese authorities to identify "undesirable" people is the problem. Google is being allowed to trade ratting out people in exchange for money.
That's a pretty strong claim. Got anything to support it?
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Surveillance and collaborating with Chinese authorities to identify "undesirable" people is the problem. Google is being allowed to trade ratting out people in exchange for money.
That's a pretty strong claim. Got anything to support it?
From an article in The Intercept quoting Jack Poulson who probably knows a few things about Dragonfly:
As an example of Dragonfly support for surveillance, many news outlets, such as Engadget, have claimed that Google will be forced to connect search queries with phone numbers, which will further the Chinese goal of having Google abet their surveillance. In China, phone numbers are linked to real names to avoid anonymity. Google is also likely to be required to both host their data on Chinese soil and to partner with a local Chinese firm, with both requirements intending to ensure Google compliance with Chinese demands.
I'm sure it will have broad benefits to Google's bank account, both inside and outside of China. This is a new ethical low for Google. They are willing to blatantly facilitate human rights violations by a volatile autocratic regime, and at the same time have the gall to lie to US Senators about it just to make a quick buck.
... testbed for rolling out to the rest of the world after. NSA officials are foaming already over their future toys.
Bach says it all.
How is it helping oppress people more than not being available in China? What extra oppression is there that doesn't already exist with the other search engines like Bing and Baijou?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
No, because Google is evil and everything they do is evil and no other opinion or thought is allowed.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
. . . Suggested reading:
https://www.nchrd.org/2018/07/...
https://www.nchrd.org/2018/07/...
https://www.scmp.com/video/chi...
https://www.rfa.org/english/ne...
https://www.theguardian.com/wo...
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018...
https://www.hrichina.org/en/pr...
https://qz.com/1129837/human-r...
https://chinachange.org/2017/1...
https://www.sciencealert.com/c...
https://news.slashdot.org/stor...