4 ms·

I am aware of America's many follies and villainous acts in support of misguided notions. It's regrettable, but Americans as a group have strived to rectify wro

by rmk 8y ago

I am aware of America's many follies and villainous acts in support of misguided notions. It's regrettable, but Americans as a group have strived to rectify wrongs and steer our country in the right direction. I deeply cherish our American values and think they're what set us apart from the rest of the world. I can't for the life of me see why Sundar Pichai should be beholden to his (significantly foreign) employees and privilege their interest over that of the nation (his nation). Remember that Google itself is tainted, being complicit in spying over Americans (PRISM, anyone?). Why shouldn't such an entity be regulated?

Daishiman 8y ago
> . It's regrettable, but Americans as a group have strived to rectify wrongs and steer our country in the right direction. I deeply cherish our American values and think they're what set us apart from the rest of the world. Ha. Ha ha. Hahahah. Please, keep drinking that Kool-Aid of American exceptionalism. Apart from the British, which other country has contributed to more invasions in foreign countries for the sake of purely economic interests? Your position is laughable, and the classic, pathetic opinion of the sort of American who hasn't traveled around the world to see that their system of values is not qualitatively different from that of most other developed Western nations.
- rmk 8y ago
  > Please, keep drinking that Kool-Aid of American exceptionalism. Apart from the British, which other country has contributed to more invasions in foreign countries for the sake of purely economic interests? I will! Which country came to the aid of Britain, and all those Western European nations when they were faced with the existential threat of Nazism? Which country has provided refuge and solace to more oppressed and exiled peoples in the world than the US? Which country fought a violent war to rid itself of slavery? Surely not the Western European nations you speak of. America has done a lot of damage in this world, but I can't think of any other nation that has done so much good either.
  - UncleEntity 8y ago
    Well, technically, we didn't fight a violent war to rid ourselves of slavery -- as hard as the history book try to push that view. Slavery died out pretty much everywhere else in the world without bloodshed so it's pretty safe to assume the US wouldn't have been different in that regard, the freeing of the slaves was more of a punitive action against the seceding states than anything else. Anyhoo, my point being that it isn't a grand example of American exceptionalism. Much better to just link to Kevin Kline's A Fish Called Wanda rant... And why doesn't my iPhone know how to spellcheck "slavery", are we trying to remove it from the language double-plus fast?
    - rmk 8y ago
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFwHQYDqf6c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFwHQYDqf6c I couldn't resist :)
    - fixermark 8y ago
      Worth remembering: slavery was outlawed in the United States after it was outlawed in Great Britain. In the long-view, the whole American Experiment may not have been a net positive for slaves and their descendants relative to a hypothetical alternate history where the Revolutionary War failed and the US was just more British Empire. Nearly impossible to say with certainty, of course, because a Britain that included the US may have had different incentives to push it away from ending slavery.
      - rmk 8y ago
        The British just exported it to locales outside their own. See the Caribbean, the remote Pacific Islands (Australia, effectively British for practical purposes at that time, enslaved many Pacific Islanders to work in plantations), much of the Indian Subcontinent, Zimbabwe/Rhodesia... shall I go on?
  - brandonsometig 8y ago
    > Which country came to the aid of Britain, and all those Western European nations when they were faced with the existential threat of Nazism? Russia mainly, from where an estimated 24 million people died. American also didn't wade into a war through purely selfless means either, if Germany managed to invade Britain and western Europe, America would have been at significant threat.
- somecontext 8y ago
  > Apart from the British, which other country has contributed to more invasions in foreign countries for the sake of purely economic interests? The "purely economic interests" qualifier makes your question difficult to answer, but France has likely been involved in more invasions in foreign countries. https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/7ax7g1/all_countries_invaded_by_france_6460_x_3490/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/7ax7g1/all_countri...
mrep 8y ago
> I can't for the life of me see why Sundar Pichai should be beholden to his (significantly foreign) employees and privilege their interest over that of the nation (his nation). He's beholden to his shareholders and every move they have made is all about that. They knew it would be bad PR but they wanted to make money so they took the contract initially and tried to keep it quite. Then, all the leaks happened causing it to backfire, tons of employees and users got upset, and so they reversed directions as they think the good reputation for attracting employees and users will pay off more than military contracts in the long term. > Remember that Google itself is tainted, being complicit in spying over Americans (PRISM, anyone?). Why shouldn't such an entity be regulated? It wasn't just Google that had to comply with prism. They as long with every other company that wants to operate in the US had to comply with it because every company has to comply with the laws of each country they operate in.
- rmk 8y ago
  > He's beholden to his shareholders and every move they have made is all about that. That's the real nub. I'd posit that this is also about keeping a small but vocal group of employees happy. However, why did Google effectively disavow all cooperation with the military to appease this group? They could have easily set up a division and staffed it with willing people. Or Alphabet the parent company could have started something else up (how costly is it to incorporate, really?). Looks like none of these things was even given serious consideration.
  - mrep 8y ago
    > They could have easily set up a division and staffed it with willing people. Or Alphabet the parent company could have started something else up (how costly is it to incorporate, really?). Looks like none of these things was even given serious consideration. Did you even read up on this story because that is essentially what they tried to do and it backfired?
    - rmk 8y ago
      > Did you even read up on this story because that is essentially what they tried to do and it backfired? I read that the 'contract was routed through' some front-company. I don't think that was separate company staffed with people to adapt google AI to this purpose.

by rmk 8y ago

Daishiman 8y ago

> . It's regrettable, but Americans as a group have strived to rectify wrongs and steer our country in the right direction. I deeply cherish our American values and think they're what set us apart from the rest of the world. Ha. Ha ha. Hahahah. Please, keep drinking that Kool-Aid of American exceptionalism. Apart from the British, which other country has contributed to more invasions in foreign countries for the sake of purely economic interests? Your position is laughable, and the classic, pathetic opinion of the sort of American who hasn't traveled around the world to see that their system of values is not qualitatively different from that of most other developed Western nations.

rmk 8y ago
> Please, keep drinking that Kool-Aid of American exceptionalism. Apart from the British, which other country has contributed to more invasions in foreign countries for the sake of purely economic interests? I will! Which country came to the aid of Britain, and all those Western European nations when they were faced with the existential threat of Nazism? Which country has provided refuge and solace to more oppressed and exiled peoples in the world than the US? Which country fought a violent war to rid itself of slavery? Surely not the Western European nations you speak of. America has done a lot of damage in this world, but I can't think of any other nation that has done so much good either.
- UncleEntity 8y ago
  Well, technically, we didn't fight a violent war to rid ourselves of slavery -- as hard as the history book try to push that view. Slavery died out pretty much everywhere else in the world without bloodshed so it's pretty safe to assume the US wouldn't have been different in that regard, the freeing of the slaves was more of a punitive action against the seceding states than anything else. Anyhoo, my point being that it isn't a grand example of American exceptionalism. Much better to just link to Kevin Kline's A Fish Called Wanda rant... And why doesn't my iPhone know how to spellcheck "slavery", are we trying to remove it from the language double-plus fast?
  - rmk 8y ago
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFwHQYDqf6c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFwHQYDqf6c I couldn't resist :)
  - fixermark 8y ago
    Worth remembering: slavery was outlawed in the United States after it was outlawed in Great Britain. In the long-view, the whole American Experiment may not have been a net positive for slaves and their descendants relative to a hypothetical alternate history where the Revolutionary War failed and the US was just more British Empire. Nearly impossible to say with certainty, of course, because a Britain that included the US may have had different incentives to push it away from ending slavery.
    - rmk 8y ago
      The British just exported it to locales outside their own. See the Caribbean, the remote Pacific Islands (Australia, effectively British for practical purposes at that time, enslaved many Pacific Islanders to work in plantations), much of the Indian Subcontinent, Zimbabwe/Rhodesia... shall I go on?
- brandonsometig 8y ago
  > Which country came to the aid of Britain, and all those Western European nations when they were faced with the existential threat of Nazism? Russia mainly, from where an estimated 24 million people died. American also didn't wade into a war through purely selfless means either, if Germany managed to invade Britain and western Europe, America would have been at significant threat.
somecontext 8y ago
> Apart from the British, which other country has contributed to more invasions in foreign countries for the sake of purely economic interests? The "purely economic interests" qualifier makes your question difficult to answer, but France has likely been involved in more invasions in foreign countries. https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/7ax7g1/all_countries_invaded_by_france_6460_x_3490/ https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/7ax7g1/all_countri...

mrep 8y ago

> I can't for the life of me see why Sundar Pichai should be beholden to his (significantly foreign) employees and privilege their interest over that of the nation (his nation). He's beholden to his shareholders and every move they have made is all about that. They knew it would be bad PR but they wanted to make money so they took the contract initially and tried to keep it quite. Then, all the leaks happened causing it to backfire, tons of employees and users got upset, and so they reversed directions as they think the good reputation for attracting employees and users will pay off more than military contracts in the long term. > Remember that Google itself is tainted, being complicit in spying over Americans (PRISM, anyone?). Why shouldn't such an entity be regulated? It wasn't just Google that had to comply with prism. They as long with every other company that wants to operate in the US had to comply with it because every company has to comply with the laws of each country they operate in.

rmk 8y ago
> He's beholden to his shareholders and every move they have made is all about that. That's the real nub. I'd posit that this is also about keeping a small but vocal group of employees happy. However, why did Google effectively disavow all cooperation with the military to appease this group? They could have easily set up a division and staffed it with willing people. Or Alphabet the parent company could have started something else up (how costly is it to incorporate, really?). Looks like none of these things was even given serious consideration.
- mrep 8y ago
  > They could have easily set up a division and staffed it with willing people. Or Alphabet the parent company could have started something else up (how costly is it to incorporate, really?). Looks like none of these things was even given serious consideration. Did you even read up on this story because that is essentially what they tried to do and it backfired?
  - rmk 8y ago
    > Did you even read up on this story because that is essentially what they tried to do and it backfired? I read that the 'contract was routed through' some front-company. I don't think that was separate company staffed with people to adapt google AI to this purpose.