7 ms·

Another question: if they do all this just to make the Chinese government happy (to earn more money), what is done to make the USA government happy (to earn mor

Another question: if they do all this just to make the Chinese government happy (to earn more money), what is done to make the USA government happy (to earn more money)? How should I trust that they won't "sell" my personal data to a government paying the most for that? How should I trust such an entity which makes the government happy, not the people? Are we really just the product sold to the people who have power? It's hard to avoid Google totally as many of the emails I send are stored later on Google's servers, even if I don't send it from a Google account. "Don't be evil" should rather be changed to "Don't be evil (whatever makes money is fine)". At the same time China switched off the corruption AI, the rumor says that because it was too efficient in tracking the officials. If Google supports such a system, what would be next? Covering for selling children? On the other hand, when Nazis were making the death camps, many companies happily provided lots of help, all for money. Seems like for too many stakeholders the money is the only thing that matters, not the people. Even if this is behind "don't be evil" faded unreadable flag. I'm not living in the USA, should I assume that Google will work with my government to do evil against me?

close04 8y ago
> How should I trust You shouldn't.
- pcr910303 8y ago
  Can you? I’m not the original commenter, but in my country (South Korea) every person is expected to have a gmail account :-( I have a google account, but it’s not gmail and people always get confused... We have to use Google Classroom for submitting homework, Google Docs for collaboration of team projects (sometimes MS Teams), Google Blah for something else... heck we even need a Google/FB account for upvoting a president e-petition! Do you have any tips for living without trusting Google/FB?
  - zeta0134 8y ago
    Disclaimer: Since we're from different countries (I'm from the US), I realize that I am necessarily speaking from a position of privilege. If I tell an employer here that I deleted my Facebook account, they'll usually understand because we're all seen the drama in our local news. Still, if you want to cut ties with Google/FB, I think it's best to start small. Basically, you can start by coming up with a list of those Google/FB services that you use, and then figure out what alternatives (ideally open source, or self hosted) might be able to replace them. Don't feel pressured to do this all at once, just keep an eye out for alternatives and give them a try as time permits. The idea is not to keep all your eggs in one basket: what happens if Google decides one day to delete your account? You should ideally be able to brush that off and keep going. If you're technically minded, a lot of those services can be self hosted on a cheap VPS. Granted means you're now trusting your VPS provider, but there are ways to mitigate much of that risk and since you're in greater control, it's easy to spread out. This is a good place to start: https://github.com/Kickball/awesome-selfhosted https://github.com/Kickball/awesome-selfhosted For email, I personally use a privacy-conscious provider, because I find self-hosting email is more complicated than I care to keep up with. I'm using Fastmail and have been pretty happy with them so far. It helps that they're not ad-supported, and their entire pitch is built on that trust, so I feel that they're a bit less likely to violate it; the PR backlash would ruin them. To each their own though. And of course... some of the big services are genuinely useful! Even though I've reduced my reliance on Google, I still have that old account for the small handful of places where it's needed (rare) or where I personally find that it's the best choice on the market (Maps and Docs) which makes the risk worth it for some of my tasks. Just because I use their services sometimes though doesn't mean they're the only option; by this point I've got an alternative lined up for everything on my list. Each task is independent, and each risk its own. Take the time, do the research, and learn to make your own informed decisions. You'll be glad you did.
    - yorwba 8y ago
      > Since we're from different countries (I'm from the US), I realize that I am necessarily speaking from a position of privilege. The implicit value judgment of the US as necessarily superior has the opposite effect of what you probably intended.
  - rizzin 8y ago
    Could it be an issue local to your school / university? Frankly, I can understand many institutions using those services simply because they actually do provide convenience. I live in Korea and haven't really noticed anything like the "have a gmail account or be excluded from life" dichotomy you have described. Not sure what "upvoting a president e-petition" is, but you don't need neither FB nor Google for voting in elections.
    - pcr910303 8y ago
      While the Google Classroom thing is local to our school, the general expectation that everyone has an gmail account is present and real, as far as I experienced. For example, the reason why I made a Google account was because one of my academies was only willing to share videos with Google Drive. Also, most of my friends (even ones that are aware of this kind of problems) have a Google account for similar reasons :-( I think it’s partially due to the fast spread of Android smartphones (and it’s high market share) circa 2010 ~ 2012 when you were mandated to make a Gmail account to download apps from the Play store. While off topic, the e-petition I said about is actually pretty popular, after the new government came in in 2017. (I’m talking about “국민청원”, if you read Korean.) To express your opinion, you need a Google/FB account.
  - close04 8y ago
    Trusting something goes beyond using it. You can use a product you don’t trust if you have to. It just means you’ll have to be a lot more careful with how you use it and have no expectations of privacy. It means you don’t let your guard down and don’t give that service anything more than you need to make it work. What I’m saying is to never give Google or FB something and assume they would always be on your side. Assume the worst even if you continue to use their services.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
tiredyam 8y ago
dont be evil was dropped a while ago. Also, there is no censorship of the internet going on to appease the US government so I think we are good there.
- pleasecalllater 8y ago
  > Also, there is no censorship of the internet going on to appease the US government so I think we are good there. I'd add "at this moment"
  - tiredyam 8y ago
    ok and there is censorship in china rn, i dont understand your point. You could say "at this moment" about literally ANYTHING
- r3bl 8y ago
  > dont be evil was dropped a while ago. In practice... maybe. In theory, it's still there in their Code of Conduct, right at the bottom.
  - MrZongle2 8y ago
    Seems like upper management pays about as much attention to that as the average consumer pays attention to an EULA.
- provolone 8y ago
  As we discuss this Facebook is meeting with the government. Politicians are concerned that Internet comments were used to 'manipulate' the previous election. The suggested solution is verifying the identity of online commentators.
  - tiredyam 8y ago
    interesting, i would actually be in favor of that on FB and other mainstream social networks and I would not consider that censorship in the traditional sense.
t0astbread 8y ago
> On the other hand, when Nazis were making the death camps, many companies happily provided lots of help, all for money Was it all because of money? Wouldn't they (the companies and their executives) have faced consequences if they turned down an "offer" by the Nazi government? You're generally right but I don't think bringing Nazis into this discussion is a good idea.
- throwaway2048 8y ago
  The Chinese communist party has killed more people than the nazis ever did.
  - 29ssyg 8y ago
    And the old Communists too. But you know who's in charge of the narrative...
  - pferde 8y ago
    Irrelevant to the topic at hand.
  - berdario 8y ago
    So did the British... a more cogent rebuttal is to point out that US companies like IBM didn't really need to do business with Nazi Germany for their survival. I trust Google to not be generally evil, but when they still do something evil or with bad consequence we should still hold them (and any other capitalist behemoth) accountable.
- sasasassy 8y ago
  I think the parent comment was referring to IBM in the Holocaust. Foreign powerful companies that would really have little to lose for not helping the Nazi regime.
Joakal 8y ago
Appreciate that you have more rights. Look at the Huawei saga where the CFO was able to sue for false imprisonment in Canada and compare it to those Canadians arrested/affected by Chinese government in retaliation for Canada arresting the Huawei CFO. > The claim states that Meng's rights under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms were violated. Meng, who remains under house arrest in Vancouver, suffered "mental distress, anxiety and loss of liberty", it says. The claim seeks declarations that her Charter rights were infringed, various damages and costs, all unspecified. [https://www.afr.com/news/politics/world/huawei-cfo-files-suit-v-canada-for-arrest-on-suspicion-of-breaking-iran-sanctions-20190304-h1bxxo https://www.afr.com/news/politics/world/huawei-cfo-files-sui...]
tzfld 8y ago
They are for-profit organizations. They will make happy those who pay more. Simple rule of capitalism. Don't know why some are still wondering about this.
- negamax 8y ago
  What do you mean? There's a difference between for profit and for profit only. If we set aside all moral and ethical arguments in favor of money then where do we stop with this? Why give corporations only free pass. Can we not just pass thugs, dubious professionals as just plain old capitalism. This argument and line of thinking is absurd and very animalistic.
  - O_H_E 8y ago
    Yes. I think @tzfld meant that the current system of capitalism encourages (or rather, is very late to discourage) these companies skip over "moral and ethical arguments in favor of money" and that they are turning quite "animalistic"
O_H_E 8y ago
> Are we really just the product sold ...? I you are not paying for a product, there is a good chance that you are the product.

close04 8y ago

> How should I trust You shouldn't.

pcr910303 8y ago
Can you? I’m not the original commenter, but in my country (South Korea) every person is expected to have a gmail account :-( I have a google account, but it’s not gmail and people always get confused... We have to use Google Classroom for submitting homework, Google Docs for collaboration of team projects (sometimes MS Teams), Google Blah for something else... heck we even need a Google/FB account for upvoting a president e-petition! Do you have any tips for living without trusting Google/FB?
- zeta0134 8y ago
  Disclaimer: Since we're from different countries (I'm from the US), I realize that I am necessarily speaking from a position of privilege. If I tell an employer here that I deleted my Facebook account, they'll usually understand because we're all seen the drama in our local news. Still, if you want to cut ties with Google/FB, I think it's best to start small. Basically, you can start by coming up with a list of those Google/FB services that you use, and then figure out what alternatives (ideally open source, or self hosted) might be able to replace them. Don't feel pressured to do this all at once, just keep an eye out for alternatives and give them a try as time permits. The idea is not to keep all your eggs in one basket: what happens if Google decides one day to delete your account? You should ideally be able to brush that off and keep going. If you're technically minded, a lot of those services can be self hosted on a cheap VPS. Granted means you're now trusting your VPS provider, but there are ways to mitigate much of that risk and since you're in greater control, it's easy to spread out. This is a good place to start: https://github.com/Kickball/awesome-selfhosted https://github.com/Kickball/awesome-selfhosted For email, I personally use a privacy-conscious provider, because I find self-hosting email is more complicated than I care to keep up with. I'm using Fastmail and have been pretty happy with them so far. It helps that they're not ad-supported, and their entire pitch is built on that trust, so I feel that they're a bit less likely to violate it; the PR backlash would ruin them. To each their own though. And of course... some of the big services are genuinely useful! Even though I've reduced my reliance on Google, I still have that old account for the small handful of places where it's needed (rare) or where I personally find that it's the best choice on the market (Maps and Docs) which makes the risk worth it for some of my tasks. Just because I use their services sometimes though doesn't mean they're the only option; by this point I've got an alternative lined up for everything on my list. Each task is independent, and each risk its own. Take the time, do the research, and learn to make your own informed decisions. You'll be glad you did.
  - yorwba 8y ago
    > Since we're from different countries (I'm from the US), I realize that I am necessarily speaking from a position of privilege. The implicit value judgment of the US as necessarily superior has the opposite effect of what you probably intended.
- rizzin 8y ago
  Could it be an issue local to your school / university? Frankly, I can understand many institutions using those services simply because they actually do provide convenience. I live in Korea and haven't really noticed anything like the "have a gmail account or be excluded from life" dichotomy you have described. Not sure what "upvoting a president e-petition" is, but you don't need neither FB nor Google for voting in elections.
  - pcr910303 8y ago
    While the Google Classroom thing is local to our school, the general expectation that everyone has an gmail account is present and real, as far as I experienced. For example, the reason why I made a Google account was because one of my academies was only willing to share videos with Google Drive. Also, most of my friends (even ones that are aware of this kind of problems) have a Google account for similar reasons :-( I think it’s partially due to the fast spread of Android smartphones (and it’s high market share) circa 2010 ~ 2012 when you were mandated to make a Gmail account to download apps from the Play store. While off topic, the e-petition I said about is actually pretty popular, after the new government came in in 2017. (I’m talking about “국민청원”, if you read Korean.) To express your opinion, you need a Google/FB account.
- close04 8y ago
  Trusting something goes beyond using it. You can use a product you don’t trust if you have to. It just means you’ll have to be a lot more careful with how you use it and have no expectations of privacy. It means you don’t let your guard down and don’t give that service anything more than you need to make it work. What I’m saying is to never give Google or FB something and assume they would always be on your side. Assume the worst even if you continue to use their services.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

tiredyam 8y ago

dont be evil was dropped a while ago. Also, there is no censorship of the internet going on to appease the US government so I think we are good there.

pleasecalllater 8y ago
> Also, there is no censorship of the internet going on to appease the US government so I think we are good there. I'd add "at this moment"
- tiredyam 8y ago
  ok and there is censorship in china rn, i dont understand your point. You could say "at this moment" about literally ANYTHING
r3bl 8y ago
> dont be evil was dropped a while ago. In practice... maybe. In theory, it's still there in their Code of Conduct, right at the bottom.
- MrZongle2 8y ago
  Seems like upper management pays about as much attention to that as the average consumer pays attention to an EULA.
provolone 8y ago
As we discuss this Facebook is meeting with the government. Politicians are concerned that Internet comments were used to 'manipulate' the previous election. The suggested solution is verifying the identity of online commentators.
- tiredyam 8y ago
  interesting, i would actually be in favor of that on FB and other mainstream social networks and I would not consider that censorship in the traditional sense.

t0astbread 8y ago

> On the other hand, when Nazis were making the death camps, many companies happily provided lots of help, all for money Was it all because of money? Wouldn't they (the companies and their executives) have faced consequences if they turned down an "offer" by the Nazi government? You're generally right but I don't think bringing Nazis into this discussion is a good idea.

throwaway2048 8y ago
The Chinese communist party has killed more people than the nazis ever did.
- 29ssyg 8y ago
  And the old Communists too. But you know who's in charge of the narrative...
- pferde 8y ago
  Irrelevant to the topic at hand.
- berdario 8y ago
  So did the British... a more cogent rebuttal is to point out that US companies like IBM didn't really need to do business with Nazi Germany for their survival. I trust Google to not be generally evil, but when they still do something evil or with bad consequence we should still hold them (and any other capitalist behemoth) accountable.
sasasassy 8y ago
I think the parent comment was referring to IBM in the Holocaust. Foreign powerful companies that would really have little to lose for not helping the Nazi regime.

Joakal 8y ago

Appreciate that you have more rights. Look at the Huawei saga where the CFO was able to sue for false imprisonment in Canada and compare it to those Canadians arrested/affected by Chinese government in retaliation for Canada arresting the Huawei CFO. > The claim states that Meng's rights under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms were violated. Meng, who remains under house arrest in Vancouver, suffered "mental distress, anxiety and loss of liberty", it says. The claim seeks declarations that her Charter rights were infringed, various damages and costs, all unspecified. [https://www.afr.com/news/politics/world/huawei-cfo-files-suit-v-canada-for-arrest-on-suspicion-of-breaking-iran-sanctions-20190304-h1bxxo https://www.afr.com/news/politics/world/huawei-cfo-files-sui...]

tzfld 8y ago

They are for-profit organizations. They will make happy those who pay more. Simple rule of capitalism. Don't know why some are still wondering about this.

negamax 8y ago
What do you mean? There's a difference between for profit and for profit only. If we set aside all moral and ethical arguments in favor of money then where do we stop with this? Why give corporations only free pass. Can we not just pass thugs, dubious professionals as just plain old capitalism. This argument and line of thinking is absurd and very animalistic.
- O_H_E 8y ago
  Yes. I think @tzfld meant that the current system of capitalism encourages (or rather, is very late to discourage) these companies skip over "moral and ethical arguments in favor of money" and that they are turning quite "animalistic"

O_H_E 8y ago

> Are we really just the product sold ...? I you are not paying for a product, there is a good chance that you are the product.