Slashdot Mirror


Google Is Still Working on China Search Engine, Employees Claim

Google is still pursuing its plan to launch a censored search engine for China, The Intercept reported Monday, citing unnamed employees. From the report: Late last year, bosses moved engineers away from working on the controversial project, known as Dragonfly, and said that there were no current plans to launch it. However, a group of employees at the company was unsatisfied with the lack of information from leadership on the issue -- and took matters into their own hands. The group has identified ongoing work on a batch of code that is associated with the China search engine, according to three Google sources. [...] The employees have been keeping tabs on repositories of code that are stored on Google's computers, which they say is linked to Dragonfly. The code was created for two smartphone search apps -- named Maotai and Longfei -- that Google planned to roll out in China for users of Android and iOS mobile devices.

38 of 82 comments (clear)

  1. Flawed Understanding of Corporate America by al0ha · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These Google employees make me laugh. They really think Google is going to give up untold millions of dollars just because China requires filtered search results that adhere to the Politburo's censorship?

    Me-thinks all you people need to get out and vote if you really want to create change where US companies do not do business with Totalitarian regimes and support censorship and servitude.

    --
    Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
    1. Re:Flawed Understanding of Corporate America by 110010001000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It really isn't surprising. I mean look at Tesla. The rank and file really believe in a "mission" that is beyond making billions for the board members. It is rather astonishing, but I guess when you worship technology you find your saviours there.

    2. Re:Flawed Understanding of Corporate America by 110010001000 · · Score: 2

      That's great: they are making a product they think they can make billions on. That isn't surprising. The surprising thing is that a lot of people believe that there is some "mission" above that. Tesla found a set of people to market to. There isn't anything beyond that.

    3. Re:Flawed Understanding of Corporate America by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      No that is not the "mission" that the rank-and-file are talking about. You are missing my point completely. My point is that the sole purpose of these tech companies are to make money. Nothing more. The worship of Google/Tesla/etc. are astounding, but there is a large intersection of tech and money right now so a lot of people are completely besotted with them. I see that unraveling very soon as people start seeing these companies for what they really are: just American corporations out to make a buck.

    4. Re:Flawed Understanding of Corporate America by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      It's not about "missions", it's about people voting with their dollars.

      Some people don't care about destroying the planet even further and so those fucking idiots buy polluting, gas-guzzling SUVs.

      Everyone else wants to buy electric cars because even coal-powered electric plants can do a better job at filtering the pollution than millions of cars. And you can make electricity a lot of different ways like hydro, wind, solar and nuclear.

      And in theory, a well-maintained electric car from 2019 could still be used in 2049 with a much higher driving range because of breakthroughs in battery technology in the next three decades.

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
    5. Re: Flawed Understanding of Corporate America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Detroit Electric built 13,000 electric cars from 1907 to 1939.

    6. Re:Flawed Understanding of Corporate America by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Thats nice. But that isn't what I am talking about.

    7. Re: Flawed Understanding of Corporate America by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Impossible. Tesla made the first electric car.

    8. Re:Flawed Understanding of Corporate America by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Why limit yourself to one approach when you can attack the problem in every way you can?

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    9. Re: Flawed Understanding of Corporate America by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the goal is to get Tesla rich, nothing else. There is no other mission. If they could make a lot more money creating coal-powered cars they would do it. The only green these companies see is money. Google figured out they could make a lot of money selling our data, and even more selling out the Chinese. So they did it. American corporations are not your buddy or benevolent. The fact that they even have "mission statements" is completely dishonest.

  2. Perhaps a novel compromise by presidenteloco · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Would be to have the search censorship mode for China, but with the following "features":

    1) No disclosure to Chinese authorities about who is searching for what.
    2) A full public list visible on the web everywhere in the world (or everywhere except China) of all of the search terms and logic used to do the censoring (transparent censoring?? haha)
    3) A monthly count disclosed on the non-China website of what percentage of searches were censored.

    Or something like that.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    1. Re:Perhaps a novel compromise by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 3, Informative

      Perhaps a novel compromise

      Wow... talk about not understanding how authoritarianism works.

      In China, you do things their way; no highway option.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  3. Someone will do it! by zippo01 · · Score: 1

    If Google doesn't do it, someone else will...

  4. Politics vs. Execution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Generally anyone who disagrees with Google's approach to this is lacking what most people lack when it comes to effecting change. If you disagree with China's policies regarding censorship, why would you want Google to stop? If you stop the project entirely, then you don't have a seat at the table and China will make it on their own. At least Google gets to influence direction and build a level of comfort in that over time can help them ease up on their control. Policy exists because of cultural attitudes, and culture changes slowly; usually over generations.

    China's approach to free speech is extremely different than most Western thoughts on this, but when understood in the context of their history is completely understandable. China has gone through several cycles over the past several thousand years where affluence and economic growth leads to a cultural mismatch between classes, that often results in a period of major wars, destruction and death. The Chinese government knows this, and they know they're currently headed to one of those cycles again, as about 400M people live in a decent middle class lifestyle and about 900M people live in poverty today. They also know they cannot stop the process, but they are trying to manage it and spread the wealth of the coastal regions inland. The government views, and they do this through the lens of history as this is exactly how the Communist Party came to power, uncontrolled free speech as a chaotic force that can only accelerate this process and not control it, leading to a dysfunctional society at best and a major war at worst. President Xi Jinping is an authoritarian and not one to admire, but his massive anti-corruption campaign is designed to root out those in the way of spreading the coastal regions' wealth to the interior to avoid this exact issue.

    Anyone including Google needs to approach working with China in this context. I'm not saying it's right; it is highly risky to do business there, but you also cannot force Western-style morals on doing business in China when the Chinese experience is very different.

    1. Re:Politics vs. Execution by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

      You would think that 1.386 billion freely expressed views might just kind of cancel out.

      Or I suppose, fragment into two polarized camps that don't listen to each other.

      --

      Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    2. Re:Politics vs. Execution by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you disagree with China's policies regarding censorship, why would you want Google to stop?

      Because the second it's complete, other nations will suddenly demand their own. This is about more than just China.

      If you stop the project entirely, then you don't have a seat at the table and China will make it on their own.

      They already have... and it's based on old stolen IP from Google.

      At least Google gets to influence direction and build a level of comfort in that over time can help them ease up on their control.

      In an authoritarian regime that is hellbent on becoming a massive exporter of goods by 2025? Please, don't make me laugh.

      China's approach to free speech is extremely different than most Western thoughts on this, but when understood in the context of their history is completely understandable.

      China's only approach to free speech has been to crush it. The people who want to speak the truth a jailed and/or killed. I don't think anyone in China wants to be jailed or killed.

      China has gone through several cycles over the past several thousand years where affluence and economic growth leads to a cultural mismatch between classes, that often results in a period of major wars, destruction and death. The Chinese government knows this, and they know they're currently headed to one of those cycles again, as about 400M people live in a decent middle class lifestyle and about 900M people live in poverty today.

      They should keep doing the same thing but you are expecting a different outcome? Perhaps it's time for a new approach. Taiwan is doing quite well. Seems like maybe that's the better model to follow.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  5. Many countries are trying to regulate by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

    the Internet in their own special ways nowadays.
    Maybe it will fragment into 30 different country-nets instead of 2.

    All the more reason why we need a distributed encrypted file-fragment layer that completely dissociates physical location from content, and a more secure and performant version of onion-routing for retrieval and coalescing of the information for the end user.

    It will probably have to be buried, steganography-style, in thousands of seemingly innocent image or video serving sites world wide. I wonder where we could find those? ...

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  6. Not sure how Google employees think this works, but you don't get to tell your employer what to do.

    Yes, China is awful. (And when I say that, I get called a right wing war monger by .... your average Google employee type.)

    1. Re:hmm by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 2

      Not sure how Google employees think this works, but you don't get to tell your employer what to do.

      Or, they unionize and do. That's literally what a union is for.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    2. Re:hmm by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      Not sure how Google employees think this works, but you don't get to tell your employer what to do.

      Employees have a right to try and change (or at least guide) the corporate culture of their employer. And, since the actions and reputation of the employer get reflected onto the employee, if they see the company doing something they feel is unethical, tarnishes the brand, or is in other ways detrimental to the well-being of the company they have a right to speak up to try and stop those actions.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    3. Re:hmm by TigerPlish · · Score: 2

      So yes, toady cocksucker, you do get to tell your employer what you expect of them when it comes to violating ethical codes of conduct or working on secret projects that undermine freedoms or collude with autocratic govts.

      And then you get reassigned to Siberia (it's a metaphor, look it up) or you get to walk the plank (another metaphor)

      It's like that everywhere I've been to.

      Go ahead, kick your boss' door down and tell him you refuse to work on anything that you find personally offensive. Do it. Right now. March in there and tell him off. Let's see how much time goes by before you're on the street with a box with your things in it.

      The Real World has a habit of dulling even the keenest-edged bright-eyed idealist.

      --
      The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
    4. Re:hmm by swillden · · Score: 1

      Go ahead, kick your boss' door down and tell him you refuse to work on anything that you find personally offensive. Do it. Right now. March in there and tell him off. Let's see how much time goes by before you're on the street with a box with your things in it.

      I've done it. Multiple times in my career, at multiple employers, including Google. Not once has it led to firing, or any disciplinary action whatsoever. On at least one occasion it contributed to my promotion.

      Many bosses are not only sympathetic to their employees' moral concerns, but appreciate the broader and deeper thinking that the existence of those concerns demonstrates. Integrity and morality are traits most companies find highly desirable in employees.

      If your boss and your employer don't value your opinion (which isn't the same thing as doing what you say), you should look for a better job.

      FWIW, I work for Google and voiced my opposition to Dragonfly. My boss is more strongly opposed than me, though, and his boss is opposed as well, so I never had any concerns about repercussions for speaking up.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re: hmm by Highdude702 · · Score: 1

      Especially if the company used an image and reputation for not doing unethical things to attract that talent to begin with.

      Yes because tracking your every moment and selling it to others is so ethical. That is the dumbest shit I've ever read on slashdot. And I'm sure a lot of people will agree there is a bunch of dumb shit said here daily. But you sir cut the cake.

  7. I don't get the Hate for this project by Paxtez · · Score: 2

    Yes, being in China would suck. But their policies certainly aren't going to change because of a google.cn site.

    There are numerous benefits to them setting up shop there:
      - Taking money out of the Chinese economy and putting it into ours
      - Giving Chinese citizens more information is better
      - Allows Google to create a foothold in China. If they become a major player there, they might be able to effect change down the line

    The only real downside is the fact the engine will probably fail and thus cost money.

    1. Re:I don't get the Hate for this project by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Spoken like a good technocrat.

    2. Re:I don't get the Hate for this project by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yes, being in China would suck. But their policies certainly aren't going to change because of a google.cn site.

      The second this censorship engine is complete, other nations will suddenly demand their own version too. This is about more than just China.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    3. Re:I don't get the Hate for this project by Paxtez · · Score: 1

      While that is a good point that I hadn't considered before. I'm still not convinced:

          - Other search engines already exist in a censored state in China (bing)
          - I think if a country was going to be an asshole, I don't think it would depend on Google. They would just tell google search that they can't exist there without there without being censored.

    4. Re: I don't get the Hate for this project by astrofurter · · Score: 1

      Nah. He spoke like a good collaborator.

  8. Ok ok then by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

    Just -balloon-drone-drop millions of smartphones into rural china where the smartphones talk to the new high-speed satellite Internet that's going up now. That way the resistance can communicate, or somewhat riskily watch unlimited Youtube.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    1. Re:Ok ok then by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      So you want them to break the law and give away a billion dollars in tech? Doesn't sound like a winning proposition in anyone's boardroom.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    2. Re:Ok ok then by PPH · · Score: 1

      the new high-speed satellite Internet

      Just look at how pissy the USA gets about Americans receiving content from foreign satellites. Not going to work in China.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  9. Re:Your point was unclear as made but also obvious by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

    No, they are the same. Apple, Google, Microsoft, Tesla, Facebook, etc. They have a single goal. It is just amazing to me that people believe otherwise, but I guess that is the way it is. By the way: "Do no evil" was ALWAYS a joke. You just found out that it wasn't. But Google always knew it was.

  10. No no by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

    that sub-project would be done as a crypto-funded "open sourced" effort by persons unknown concerned only with the spread of information and liberty etc etc.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    1. Re:No no by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Doesn't sound like a winning proposition in anyone's boardroom.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  11. I call bull, mr/ms binary by presidenteloco · · Score: 3, Informative

    Tesla gave away its EV tech patents royalty-free, to try to speed up the overall transition to EVs by letting other competing companies use their tech specs for free.

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
    1. Re:I call bull, mr/ms binary by omfglearntoplay · · Score: 1

      I did not know that, but damn I am even more impressed now. There might be a few truly not-so-evil business types out there. The wikipedia guy seemed pretty decent, too.

      In the case of Google and these employees, I hope they keep making waves. Google, whether the execs like it or not, is built by regular engineers and regular people. They can make or break that company.

    2. Re:I call bull, mr/ms binary by _merlin · · Score: 1

      There are two reasons for this:

      • Firstly, they realised that they're competing largely with Chinese companies (e.g. BYD, Geely) and China has different ideas about intellectual property. Patents require you to publish, making it relatively easy to copy. They'll keep the real crown jewels as trade secrets and hope they don't lose to reverse-engineering too soon.
      • Secondly, if they make specifications open it may encourage an ecosystem to develop around e.g. their charger standard, cell form factor, etc. If their technology becomes a de-facto standard it helps reduce costs for them.
  12. Re: To be honest, who really cares by astrofurter · · Score: 1

    I know a man here in the City who used to work as a merc in various African border wars. He's a good man; albeit one with whom you would not want to have a fist fight. However he has no illusions that he was "killing terrorists" or any similar pap. He was a mercenary fighting on behalf of the highest bidder, that's it.