5 ms·

It's the danger that we're getting as these global companies have more influence over the entire planet. The morality of the home country is pushed on those who

It's the danger that we're getting as these global companies have more influence over the entire planet. The morality of the home country is pushed on those who want to use the service. Same thing with the whole Google / Huawei stoush. US priorities have an impact on users all over the world.

latch 7y ago
The morality of the largest economies (generally backed by the largest military) has always been pushed onto others. Isn't this the way the world has worked since the dawn of the first civilizations? Not you specifically, but most people on HN have probably been the overwhelming beneficiaries of this approach.
- omegaworks 7y ago
  > Not you specifically, but most people on HN have probably been the overwhelming beneficiaries of this approach. That doesn't make it right.
- lone_haxx0r 7y ago
  Do you say that because most people on HN live in the USA and other developed countries? Just curious.
  - bsamuels 7y ago
    that's probably why he's saying that, yes
- Barrin92 7y ago
  >Isn't this the way the world has worked since the dawn of the first civilizations? Not really, for most of humanity's history people could barely even figure out what happened on the other side of the mountain or the sea. The extreme degree of globalisation that carries these policies and attitudes across the globe is pretty new. It wasn't even the case in the 60s or 70s say. It's predominantly online markets that are dominated by individual companies, control used to be significantly more national.
  - ygjb 7y ago
    > Not really, for most of humanity's history people could barely even figure out what happened on the other side of the mountain or the sea. And yet, for around 30,000 years people have been going off to battle to impose ideals, take stuff, or stop other folks imposing ideals and taking stuff. The average mook in those battles may not have known what was going on, nor did the folks who stayed home in relative safety, but make no mistake, the wealthy and powerful have been imposing their morality as long as there has been a threat to wealth and power... it just happens much more quickly and broadly these days.
    - acct1771 7y ago
      Is this a good thing?
      - jammygit 7y ago
        The southern USA was forced to give up slavery. Not to condone war in general, but there are at least a few examples that weren't strictly bad
  - pjc50 7y ago
    British imperialism managed this over a century ago, although the globalised culture wasn't present throughout the colonised societies, only in the upper level. Telegrams could pass the most important news all the way to Capetown, before the radio took over. This also came with the imposition of Victorian morals everywhere (bans on homosexuality, mandatory opium).
mlazos 7y ago
This got me thinking, this is kind of encouraged from an engineering perspective. It's a lot easier to not have to maintain all these different versions, and just have one. Not necessarily the reason they're doing it because google already has this working at scale for search, but still intriguing at least for smaller companies that operate globally.
- disordinary 7y ago
  Yeah, although I work in the fintech industry and we have to do a lot of work to comply with local regulations and data sovereignty laws in most countries. It's daunting but you can still engineer to have the same versions of applications deployed globally with different configurations per region.
- AstralStorm 7y ago
  They already have region functionality in store. It is lazy to just wholesale ban apps...
  - j16sdiz 7y ago
    Do they have region app review team as well?
  - ryanmercer 7y ago
    >It is lazy to just wholesale ban apps.. In this case it isn't. Marijuana is federally illegal in the United States, if they profit at all from apps that help connect buyers and sellers of an illicit (in the U.S>) substance, they suddenly expose themselves. They could lose government contracts, they could face criminal investigation, could have funds seized, could have payment processors and banks drop them as customers, etc.
dalbasal 7y ago
Good point. Let's take a relatively trivial example: TV "appropriateness." Mainland western Europe have different standards to the US. They are more tolerant of bad language and nudity in daytime programming, less tolerant of violence. Other places have different tolerances (political & religious taboos, often). YouTube's policies are clearly of the US flavour.
- kristofferR 7y ago
  Yeah. To watch a Norwegian educational series for kids to prepare them for puberty, you first have to confirm that you're above 18 on Youtube... They've outright removed episode 6, since it covers female puberty, while the episodes about males is allowed. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJX8EALqb4PzmhYdnK6AxcAhm45FyCCK- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJX8EALqb4PzmhYdnK6Ax... It's the same backwards situation on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/p/BhrSKOiFawg/ https://www.instagram.com/p/BhrSKOiFawg/
  - treis 7y ago
    >They've outright removed episode 6, since it covers female puberty, while the episodes about males is allowed. I don't think that's the reason. Episode 1 has full female nudity and a scene with menstrual blood running down a leg. Episode 6 has a close up of a very cleanly waxed vagina from a skinny woman. That probably tripped child porn filters (automated or manual). Did not expect my day to include watching Norweigan puberty videos.
    - ksaj 7y ago
      The video in the link has a prepubescent and mid-pubescent penis that didn't trip any kiddy porn filter. So the question remains valid. It seems conspicuous and one-sided for a filter like that. I didn't see the bloody one. Just as well, because the last time I saw that was in a horror movie. PS: Your last sentence made me laugh.
      - treis 7y ago
ezoe 7y ago
In many countries, marijuana is an illegal drug. In such countries, dealing with the illegal drugs is a serious crime. Also, dealing with the person/company/organization who deal with the illegal drugs are also illegal. The end result is, global companies can't do business that is legal on some countries, but illegal on majority of coutries. On some illegal activities such as endorsing the woman's right, freedom of speech, democracy, alcohol(There are countries which prohibit these), they ignore it since it has established its place or not dealing with are also serious crime, or the countries which prohibit such act is minority. But for totally new topic like marijuana, It's safer to not dealing with.
- jamesrcole 7y ago
  > global companies can't do business that is legal on some countries, but illegal on majority of coutries. Can't they make the apps available in certain countries but not others? I.e. do something that's legal in the country in question? I don't know the legal specifics but it's seem silly to me if they weren't able to.
  - ryanmercer 7y ago
    They would have to break off a separate company that never passes a cent of profit back to the original company. Marijuana is federally illegal in the United States, helping people buy it could easily be argued as a crime which exposes/risks Google's EVERYTHING - financial holdings, records, government contracts etc.
NicoJuicy 7y ago
I would hope that China's priorities have not much impact in the world
- A2017U1 7y ago
  Serious greenhouse emission reduction on 2005 levels?
  - NicoJuicy 7y ago
    So you think those rare earth metals are mined with only solar power? :) I do hope that "America's norms" aren't those of Trump and if you haven't noticed. Both democrates and liberals have agreed on the trade war.
    - A2017U1 7y ago
      What strange goalpost shifting. China's adherence to the Paris Accord despite agreeing to far greater cuts in emissions than most of the developed world is globally recognised. Trump pulled out of the worldwide agreement a few years ago and regardless the States wasn't even on track to meet it's paltry targets. The hypocrisy is front and center on the world stage.
      - NicoJuicy 7y ago
        How do you know China does this? I haven't seen any proof of them listening to "rules", WTO or any other. They say yes, but they seem to do: "meh". A plethora of examples exist. Trump pulled out and a lot of companies objected and states added local laws to object to him. Companies did extra efforts, without subsidies, because they can. Trump ( luckily) isn't a generalisation of America. As ofc XI isn't, but XI ( more the communist party) is the absolute boss of every Chinese company. If he really says no, it's done. And of course, he wants everyone to buy solar and all other tech of the Chinese. So there is money involved ;) Trump seems to be just a puppet for some game-over companies, extending their EOL.

latch 7y ago

The morality of the largest economies (generally backed by the largest military) has always been pushed onto others. Isn't this the way the world has worked since the dawn of the first civilizations? Not you specifically, but most people on HN have probably been the overwhelming beneficiaries of this approach.

omegaworks 7y ago
> Not you specifically, but most people on HN have probably been the overwhelming beneficiaries of this approach. That doesn't make it right.
lone_haxx0r 7y ago
Do you say that because most people on HN live in the USA and other developed countries? Just curious.
- bsamuels 7y ago
  that's probably why he's saying that, yes
Barrin92 7y ago
>Isn't this the way the world has worked since the dawn of the first civilizations? Not really, for most of humanity's history people could barely even figure out what happened on the other side of the mountain or the sea. The extreme degree of globalisation that carries these policies and attitudes across the globe is pretty new. It wasn't even the case in the 60s or 70s say. It's predominantly online markets that are dominated by individual companies, control used to be significantly more national.
- ygjb 7y ago
  > Not really, for most of humanity's history people could barely even figure out what happened on the other side of the mountain or the sea. And yet, for around 30,000 years people have been going off to battle to impose ideals, take stuff, or stop other folks imposing ideals and taking stuff. The average mook in those battles may not have known what was going on, nor did the folks who stayed home in relative safety, but make no mistake, the wealthy and powerful have been imposing their morality as long as there has been a threat to wealth and power... it just happens much more quickly and broadly these days.
  - acct1771 7y ago
    Is this a good thing?
    - jammygit 7y ago
      The southern USA was forced to give up slavery. Not to condone war in general, but there are at least a few examples that weren't strictly bad
- pjc50 7y ago
  British imperialism managed this over a century ago, although the globalised culture wasn't present throughout the colonised societies, only in the upper level. Telegrams could pass the most important news all the way to Capetown, before the radio took over. This also came with the imposition of Victorian morals everywhere (bans on homosexuality, mandatory opium).

mlazos 7y ago

This got me thinking, this is kind of encouraged from an engineering perspective. It's a lot easier to not have to maintain all these different versions, and just have one. Not necessarily the reason they're doing it because google already has this working at scale for search, but still intriguing at least for smaller companies that operate globally.

disordinary 7y ago
Yeah, although I work in the fintech industry and we have to do a lot of work to comply with local regulations and data sovereignty laws in most countries. It's daunting but you can still engineer to have the same versions of applications deployed globally with different configurations per region.
AstralStorm 7y ago
They already have region functionality in store. It is lazy to just wholesale ban apps...
- j16sdiz 7y ago
  Do they have region app review team as well?
- ryanmercer 7y ago
  >It is lazy to just wholesale ban apps.. In this case it isn't. Marijuana is federally illegal in the United States, if they profit at all from apps that help connect buyers and sellers of an illicit (in the U.S>) substance, they suddenly expose themselves. They could lose government contracts, they could face criminal investigation, could have funds seized, could have payment processors and banks drop them as customers, etc.

dalbasal 7y ago

Good point. Let's take a relatively trivial example: TV "appropriateness." Mainland western Europe have different standards to the US. They are more tolerant of bad language and nudity in daytime programming, less tolerant of violence. Other places have different tolerances (political & religious taboos, often). YouTube's policies are clearly of the US flavour.

kristofferR 7y ago
Yeah. To watch a Norwegian educational series for kids to prepare them for puberty, you first have to confirm that you're above 18 on Youtube... They've outright removed episode 6, since it covers female puberty, while the episodes about males is allowed. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJX8EALqb4PzmhYdnK6AxcAhm45FyCCK- https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJX8EALqb4PzmhYdnK6Ax... It's the same backwards situation on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/p/BhrSKOiFawg/ https://www.instagram.com/p/BhrSKOiFawg/
- treis 7y ago
  >They've outright removed episode 6, since it covers female puberty, while the episodes about males is allowed. I don't think that's the reason. Episode 1 has full female nudity and a scene with menstrual blood running down a leg. Episode 6 has a close up of a very cleanly waxed vagina from a skinny woman. That probably tripped child porn filters (automated or manual). Did not expect my day to include watching Norweigan puberty videos.
  - ksaj 7y ago
    The video in the link has a prepubescent and mid-pubescent penis that didn't trip any kiddy porn filter. So the question remains valid. It seems conspicuous and one-sided for a filter like that. I didn't see the bloody one. Just as well, because the last time I saw that was in a horror movie. PS: Your last sentence made me laugh.
    - treis 7y ago

ezoe 7y ago

In many countries, marijuana is an illegal drug. In such countries, dealing with the illegal drugs is a serious crime. Also, dealing with the person/company/organization who deal with the illegal drugs are also illegal. The end result is, global companies can't do business that is legal on some countries, but illegal on majority of coutries. On some illegal activities such as endorsing the woman's right, freedom of speech, democracy, alcohol(There are countries which prohibit these), they ignore it since it has established its place or not dealing with are also serious crime, or the countries which prohibit such act is minority. But for totally new topic like marijuana, It's safer to not dealing with.

jamesrcole 7y ago
> global companies can't do business that is legal on some countries, but illegal on majority of coutries. Can't they make the apps available in certain countries but not others? I.e. do something that's legal in the country in question? I don't know the legal specifics but it's seem silly to me if they weren't able to.
- ryanmercer 7y ago
  They would have to break off a separate company that never passes a cent of profit back to the original company. Marijuana is federally illegal in the United States, helping people buy it could easily be argued as a crime which exposes/risks Google's EVERYTHING - financial holdings, records, government contracts etc.

NicoJuicy 7y ago

I would hope that China's priorities have not much impact in the world

A2017U1 7y ago
Serious greenhouse emission reduction on 2005 levels?
- NicoJuicy 7y ago
  So you think those rare earth metals are mined with only solar power? :) I do hope that "America's norms" aren't those of Trump and if you haven't noticed. Both democrates and liberals have agreed on the trade war.
  - A2017U1 7y ago
    What strange goalpost shifting. China's adherence to the Paris Accord despite agreeing to far greater cuts in emissions than most of the developed world is globally recognised. Trump pulled out of the worldwide agreement a few years ago and regardless the States wasn't even on track to meet it's paltry targets. The hypocrisy is front and center on the world stage.
    - NicoJuicy 7y ago
      How do you know China does this? I haven't seen any proof of them listening to "rules", WTO or any other. They say yes, but they seem to do: "meh". A plethora of examples exist. Trump pulled out and a lot of companies objected and states added local laws to object to him. Companies did extra efforts, without subsidies, because they can. Trump ( luckily) isn't a generalisation of America. As ofc XI isn't, but XI ( more the communist party) is the absolute boss of every Chinese company. If he really says no, it's done. And of course, he wants everyone to buy solar and all other tech of the Chinese. So there is money involved ;) Trump seems to be just a puppet for some game-over companies, extending their EOL.