4 ms·

Hopefully he will testify about Project Dragonfly as well. Human rights concerns should not get lost in the noise of partisan politics. EDIT: Also, here is a s

Hopefully he will testify about Project Dragonfly as well. Human rights concerns should not get lost in the noise of partisan politics. EDIT: Also, here is a slightly better stub article with an actual quote from Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte. https://thehill.com/policy/technology/408972-house-judiciary-says-google-ceo-will-testify-later-this-year https://thehill.com/policy/technology/408972-house-judiciary...

someonelse17 8y ago
Convening a hearing on a specific subject (silly as it as in this case) then making it an open season for all other grievances is another despicable aspect of these hearings.
- math_and_stuff 8y ago
  I'm happy to see serious human rights concerns addressed in any and all forums.
  - yourbandsucks 8y ago
    How come national policy of the host country is only relevant to specifically China, though? It's one thing to say "I won't censor and that's that", one could argue about which approach does more good/harm for the Chinese citizens affected, but it's an argument. But the argument I'm seeing go around is a lot more like "fuck China specifically". Which doesn't seem to square with the other views activists generally espouse about foreign countries/cultures.
  - someonelse17 8y ago
    I don't see a unique human rights angel here, there are many companies doing business with China and a number of other "iffy" governments, if congress was truly alarmed by that they could sanction these companies. This thing became about political retribution after google dropped maven.
    - math_and_stuff 8y ago
      To be clear, this isn't about doing business in China. It is about responding to 14 human rights organizations having serious concerns [0] about proactive censorship and support for surveillance. And I agree that Google is far from alone in crossing such ethical lines in Silicon Valley. [0] https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/08/28/open-letter-google-reported-plans-launch-censored-search-engine-china https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/08/28/open-letter-google-repor...
      - someonelse17 8y ago
        I'm not talking about Silicon Valley, I'm talking about all other industries in all countries, most Silicon Valley companies are banned in China, stop vilifying Silicon Valley. I'm sure these organizations are great and are doing wonderful work but they are not government entities and Google has no obligation to respond to them, further more these are non profits, attaching themselves to a high profile subject like Google gives them more exposure and potentially more donations.
        math_and_stuff 8y ago
        I hate to bicker, but, according to Google's own AI Principles [0], they have a self-imposed obligation to respond to serious human rights concerns. They promised not to pursue "technologies whose purpose contravenes widely accepted principles of [...] human rights". [0] https://www.blog.google/technology/ai/ai-principles/ https://www.blog.google/technology/ai/ai-principles/
        someonelse17 8y ago
        It's debatable if the China thing applies, in any case congressional committees need not interfere.
        justtopost 8y ago
        All your comments have at least two things in common. 1. A seemingly willful disreguard for the facts. 2. Another striking commonality that I can't aledge but a trip through your comments will bear out. The topic always seems to be common. The timing of the account creation is of course purely circumstantial. Draw your own conclusions, but to say that you are constructively adding to discussion would be a reach.
- dang 8y ago
  We've banned this account, as we've banned many of your accounts before, for pushing propaganda for Google. Most recently https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17974966 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17974966, and it goes back a long time before that. It's time you stopped abusing HN like this. I hope it's obvious to everyone that it doesn't matter whether it's Google, $BigTechCo, or anything else being pushed this way. We have nothing against Google, this has nothing to do with what's in the press or making the rounds this week, and I'm sure that the many Googlers here are as put off by this behavior as the rest of HN. Plus they have an additional reason to be angry at you, for tarnishing their reputation. Given that we spend our days asking HN users not to accuse each other of astroturfing without evidence—because doing that is such internet poison—few things make more steam come out my ears than finding actual evidence of this abuse. You couldn't do anything worse to wreck the cohesion of this community (edit: or put Google's standing in it more at risk—users here really care about this). https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
izacus 8y ago
What exactly would an international corporation like Google gain if they'd start being a tool of American external politics and propaganda? Besides being kicked out of their other markets (EU, India, Russia) Trump considers enemies right now?
- math_and_stuff 8y ago
  Respecting Article 19 of the 1948 UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights [0] and concerns from 14 human rights organizations [1] is not America specific. It is about not secretly sacrificing basic freedoms in exchange for access to markets. [0] http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/udhr/article_19.html http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/udhr/article_19.html [1] https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/08/28/open-letter-google-reported-plans-launch-censored-search-engine-china https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/08/28/open-letter-google-repor...
bla2 8y ago
Why would the US House care about Google's business practices in China? I think Dragonfly is horrible, but why would the House care?
- math_and_stuff 8y ago
  Who else is a company headquartered in the US that is willfully ignoring serious human rights concerns accountable to? This is exactly what government is for. And they certainly cared in 2007 when Yahoo was behaving similarly [0]. Hopefully Google doesn't want to become "moral pygmies". [0] https://www.mercurynews.com/2007/11/06/lawmaker-scolds-yahoo-morally-you-are-pygmies/ https://www.mercurynews.com/2007/11/06/lawmaker-scolds-yahoo...
  - bla2 8y ago
    That was 11 years ago. All other big tech firms are doing business in China, by China's rules. Google used to be better than that. It's very sad that that's changing, but again it doesn't seem like something that's relevant for the House.
    - math_and_stuff 8y ago
      I fully support the US government regulating every US company that is willfully aiding in the violation of human rights for profit.
      - cycrutchfield 8y ago
        That's nice. Why bother questioning Google about an unreleased product when they can question any of the other big tech companies that _already_ do this?
      - mrep 8y ago
        Who defines who "violates human rights"?
      - kmlx 8y ago
abenedic 8y ago
Not really a comment on the topic, but I feel like name pollution is becoming a bigger and bigger deal recently. With Dropbox's Naultilus and DragonflyBSD and Google's Dragonfly, and like a hundred other examples, things can only get more and more confusing. Imagine talking to a Mathematician about a meager function, the word has two senses(common and mathematical). Things cannot improve the way we are heading.

someonelse17 8y ago

Convening a hearing on a specific subject (silly as it as in this case) then making it an open season for all other grievances is another despicable aspect of these hearings.

math_and_stuff 8y ago
I'm happy to see serious human rights concerns addressed in any and all forums.
- yourbandsucks 8y ago
  How come national policy of the host country is only relevant to specifically China, though? It's one thing to say "I won't censor and that's that", one could argue about which approach does more good/harm for the Chinese citizens affected, but it's an argument. But the argument I'm seeing go around is a lot more like "fuck China specifically". Which doesn't seem to square with the other views activists generally espouse about foreign countries/cultures.
- someonelse17 8y ago
  I don't see a unique human rights angel here, there are many companies doing business with China and a number of other "iffy" governments, if congress was truly alarmed by that they could sanction these companies. This thing became about political retribution after google dropped maven.
  - math_and_stuff 8y ago
    To be clear, this isn't about doing business in China. It is about responding to 14 human rights organizations having serious concerns [0] about proactive censorship and support for surveillance. And I agree that Google is far from alone in crossing such ethical lines in Silicon Valley. [0] https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/08/28/open-letter-google-reported-plans-launch-censored-search-engine-china https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/08/28/open-letter-google-repor...
    - someonelse17 8y ago
      I'm not talking about Silicon Valley, I'm talking about all other industries in all countries, most Silicon Valley companies are banned in China, stop vilifying Silicon Valley. I'm sure these organizations are great and are doing wonderful work but they are not government entities and Google has no obligation to respond to them, further more these are non profits, attaching themselves to a high profile subject like Google gives them more exposure and potentially more donations.
      - math_and_stuff 8y ago
        I hate to bicker, but, according to Google's own AI Principles [0], they have a self-imposed obligation to respond to serious human rights concerns. They promised not to pursue "technologies whose purpose contravenes widely accepted principles of [...] human rights". [0] https://www.blog.google/technology/ai/ai-principles/ https://www.blog.google/technology/ai/ai-principles/
        someonelse17 8y ago
        It's debatable if the China thing applies, in any case congressional committees need not interfere.
      - justtopost 8y ago
        All your comments have at least two things in common. 1. A seemingly willful disreguard for the facts. 2. Another striking commonality that I can't aledge but a trip through your comments will bear out. The topic always seems to be common. The timing of the account creation is of course purely circumstantial. Draw your own conclusions, but to say that you are constructively adding to discussion would be a reach.
dang 8y ago
We've banned this account, as we've banned many of your accounts before, for pushing propaganda for Google. Most recently https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17974966 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17974966, and it goes back a long time before that. It's time you stopped abusing HN like this. I hope it's obvious to everyone that it doesn't matter whether it's Google, $BigTechCo, or anything else being pushed this way. We have nothing against Google, this has nothing to do with what's in the press or making the rounds this week, and I'm sure that the many Googlers here are as put off by this behavior as the rest of HN. Plus they have an additional reason to be angry at you, for tarnishing their reputation. Given that we spend our days asking HN users not to accuse each other of astroturfing without evidence—because doing that is such internet poison—few things make more steam come out my ears than finding actual evidence of this abuse. You couldn't do anything worse to wreck the cohesion of this community (edit: or put Google's standing in it more at risk—users here really care about this). https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

izacus 8y ago

What exactly would an international corporation like Google gain if they'd start being a tool of American external politics and propaganda? Besides being kicked out of their other markets (EU, India, Russia) Trump considers enemies right now?

math_and_stuff 8y ago
Respecting Article 19 of the 1948 UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights [0] and concerns from 14 human rights organizations [1] is not America specific. It is about not secretly sacrificing basic freedoms in exchange for access to markets. [0] http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/udhr/article_19.html http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/udhr/article_19.html [1] https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/08/28/open-letter-google-reported-plans-launch-censored-search-engine-china https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/08/28/open-letter-google-repor...

bla2 8y ago

Why would the US House care about Google's business practices in China? I think Dragonfly is horrible, but why would the House care?

math_and_stuff 8y ago
Who else is a company headquartered in the US that is willfully ignoring serious human rights concerns accountable to? This is exactly what government is for. And they certainly cared in 2007 when Yahoo was behaving similarly [0]. Hopefully Google doesn't want to become "moral pygmies". [0] https://www.mercurynews.com/2007/11/06/lawmaker-scolds-yahoo-morally-you-are-pygmies/ https://www.mercurynews.com/2007/11/06/lawmaker-scolds-yahoo...
- bla2 8y ago
  That was 11 years ago. All other big tech firms are doing business in China, by China's rules. Google used to be better than that. It's very sad that that's changing, but again it doesn't seem like something that's relevant for the House.
  - math_and_stuff 8y ago
    I fully support the US government regulating every US company that is willfully aiding in the violation of human rights for profit.
    - cycrutchfield 8y ago
      That's nice. Why bother questioning Google about an unreleased product when they can question any of the other big tech companies that _already_ do this?
    - mrep 8y ago
      Who defines who "violates human rights"?
    - kmlx 8y ago

abenedic 8y ago

Not really a comment on the topic, but I feel like name pollution is becoming a bigger and bigger deal recently. With Dropbox's Naultilus and DragonflyBSD and Google's Dragonfly, and like a hundred other examples, things can only get more and more confusing. Imagine talking to a Mathematician about a meager function, the word has two senses(common and mathematical). Things cannot improve the way we are heading.