5 ms·

A common refrain that you will likely soon hear from Google executives and board members is that it's better to have access to a censored Google than no Google

A common refrain that you will likely soon hear from Google executives and board members is that it's better to have access to a censored Google than no Google at all. The problem is that when Google took a stance against censorship, users behind the Great Firewall or other censorship regimes knew that if they managed to reach www.google.com through VPN or other means they were getting uncensored results. Now, no one will ever know whether they are seeing the 'real' Google or not. Google is one of the most advanced companies at geoblocking their services. You can't just hop on a VPN and access US-only Google services from, say, a French account. Google knows where you live, where you work, where you bank, who you're dating. This raises the spectre of Chinese censorship policies being applied even to queries coming from outside of the Great Firewall from accounts that have been deemed 'Chinese'. If you think 'they would never do that', just look at how quickly US business folded in the dispute with Beijing over acknowledging Taiwan as a country. Once you have business interests in China that can be held hostage, you're all in the way.

cm2187 8y ago
But where does censorship starts? Google already have to comply with local laws everywhere it operates. Is the right to be forgotten censorship? Is removing piratebay from the listing censorship? Or does it have to do with anything that offends a US liberal political stance? Then is Google’s mission really meant to be a propaganda tool for a particular political viewpoint?
- fauigerzigerk 8y ago
  Political censorship that is supposed to keep current rulers in power by shielding them from criticism is categorically different from all other types of censorship. The difference is not gradual as you suggest, because political censorship works on a meta-level. It obstructs the democratic mechanism by which all other types of censorship can be debated and ultimately lifted. Opposing political censorship is not just another political viewpoint. It is a prerequisite to freely discussing and changing political viewpoints in the first place.
  - eastendguy 8y ago
    A 1000 times this. The key difference (as you said very well) is that in countries with a free press you can openly discuss any restrictions that are in place for various reason, may it be historic (Nazi time in Germany), cultural (the "f-word beeps" in the US) or legal, like the "secret" trials in Australia https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/14/world/australia/george-pell-trial-super-injunction.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/14/world/australia/george-pe... )
  - bo1024 8y ago
    That's a good point, but I don't think drawing the line is so easy. Take copyright and dmca. In the USA you can argue that the "copyright lobby" is effectively one of the rulers in power -- they write and enforce laws, after all, one of which is the DMCA and used for censorship. And it is absolutely meant to keep themselves in (economic) power. It also establishes a precedent for censorship more generally, a slope that can be made slipperier over time.
    - fauigerzigerk 8y ago
      Powerful as the copyright lobby may be, they haven't yet managed to make it a copyright violation to criticise copyright law or the copyright lobby itself.
throwaway2048 8y ago
Yep you can guarantee that the Chinese Government will use its newfound leverage with Google to pressure it on a wide array of fronts. What about global searches about Tienanmen square or Falun Gong, is Google going to walk away from billions and billions of profit to say no to that? Its pretty clear they have no moral issue with censoring for profit.
- zavi 8y ago
  > Its pretty clear they have no moral issue with censoring for profit. This has been evidently true since they didn't leave Europe after Right to Be Forgotten. They make good revenue in Europe which justifies having to censor results.
TeMPOraL 8y ago
A corollary to what you wrote: maybe Google is the worst player to do that, because capabilities of this company create a moral hazard here - China knows what Google can do, and so they'll ask Google to do it (or else no market). A search company that does not have such surveillance infrastructure already in place couldn't be asked for such deep filtering.
singularity2001 8y ago
even at google.com you can't be sure whether to get the real google, or just your personalized bubble.
- zavi 8y ago
  Just go incognito
  - silverdrake11 8y ago
    That'll clear your login and user data, but google still knows your ip address, os, screen resolution, browser, plugins, and many other small pieces of information that can be used to uniquely identify you and personalize your results
zavi 8y ago
> Google knows where you live, where you work, where you bank, who you're dating How do they know who I'm dating?
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  There are several ways to use information from your phone to take a good educated guess.
  - zavi 8y ago
    Such as?
    - jaimex2 8y ago
      Phone records, Messages, where you had dinner, where you spent the night, what things you Googled relating to your partner and photos.
    - AriaMinaei 8y ago
      This is for Facebook, but applies equally to Google as well: http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/21/does-facebook-know-who-youll-date-next/ http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/21/does-facebook-know-w...
    - silverdrake11 8y ago
      Snapchat explicitly does this with the BFF feature
est 8y ago
It's simple to solve, I search exclusively use google.ca and blocked all js and cookie on this domain.

cm2187 8y ago

But where does censorship starts? Google already have to comply with local laws everywhere it operates. Is the right to be forgotten censorship? Is removing piratebay from the listing censorship? Or does it have to do with anything that offends a US liberal political stance? Then is Google’s mission really meant to be a propaganda tool for a particular political viewpoint?

fauigerzigerk 8y ago
Political censorship that is supposed to keep current rulers in power by shielding them from criticism is categorically different from all other types of censorship. The difference is not gradual as you suggest, because political censorship works on a meta-level. It obstructs the democratic mechanism by which all other types of censorship can be debated and ultimately lifted. Opposing political censorship is not just another political viewpoint. It is a prerequisite to freely discussing and changing political viewpoints in the first place.
- eastendguy 8y ago
  A 1000 times this. The key difference (as you said very well) is that in countries with a free press you can openly discuss any restrictions that are in place for various reason, may it be historic (Nazi time in Germany), cultural (the "f-word beeps" in the US) or legal, like the "secret" trials in Australia https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/14/world/australia/george-pell-trial-super-injunction.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/14/world/australia/george-pe... )
- bo1024 8y ago
  That's a good point, but I don't think drawing the line is so easy. Take copyright and dmca. In the USA you can argue that the "copyright lobby" is effectively one of the rulers in power -- they write and enforce laws, after all, one of which is the DMCA and used for censorship. And it is absolutely meant to keep themselves in (economic) power. It also establishes a precedent for censorship more generally, a slope that can be made slipperier over time.
  - fauigerzigerk 8y ago
    Powerful as the copyright lobby may be, they haven't yet managed to make it a copyright violation to criticise copyright law or the copyright lobby itself.

throwaway2048 8y ago

Yep you can guarantee that the Chinese Government will use its newfound leverage with Google to pressure it on a wide array of fronts. What about global searches about Tienanmen square or Falun Gong, is Google going to walk away from billions and billions of profit to say no to that? Its pretty clear they have no moral issue with censoring for profit.

zavi 8y ago
> Its pretty clear they have no moral issue with censoring for profit. This has been evidently true since they didn't leave Europe after Right to Be Forgotten. They make good revenue in Europe which justifies having to censor results.

TeMPOraL 8y ago

A corollary to what you wrote: maybe Google is the worst player to do that, because capabilities of this company create a moral hazard here - China knows what Google can do, and so they'll ask Google to do it (or else no market). A search company that does not have such surveillance infrastructure already in place couldn't be asked for such deep filtering.

singularity2001 8y ago

even at google.com you can't be sure whether to get the real google, or just your personalized bubble.

zavi 8y ago
Just go incognito
- silverdrake11 8y ago
  That'll clear your login and user data, but google still knows your ip address, os, screen resolution, browser, plugins, and many other small pieces of information that can be used to uniquely identify you and personalize your results

zavi 8y ago

> Google knows where you live, where you work, where you bank, who you're dating How do they know who I'm dating?

dsfyu404ed 8y ago
There are several ways to use information from your phone to take a good educated guess.
- zavi 8y ago
  Such as?
  - jaimex2 8y ago
    Phone records, Messages, where you had dinner, where you spent the night, what things you Googled relating to your partner and photos.
  - AriaMinaei 8y ago
    This is for Facebook, but applies equally to Google as well: http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/21/does-facebook-know-who-youll-date-next/ http://scitech.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/21/does-facebook-know-w...
  - silverdrake11 8y ago
    Snapchat explicitly does this with the BFF feature

est 8y ago

It's simple to solve, I search exclusively use google.ca and blocked all js and cookie on this domain.