4 ms·

Google is 1000 times more transparent company than ByteDance. It is OK to use US services for non-US countries.

by lightgreen 6y ago

sschueller 6y ago
Says the USA... "You can trust us, we don't listen on your foreign leaders". Come on, that ship has sailed years ago.
- lightgreen 6y ago
  It was US government agencies, not private companies who were spying. So, to clarify, other countries can use US private company services, but should not blindly trust their secret data to the US government.
  - HenryBemis 6y ago
    USA has a track record of issuing a request for info (if not other shadier methods) tied with a gag order. So... and if the Snowden/Wikileaks/ATT room 641A has taught us anything (combined with the 5-9-14 eyes), is that we cannot trust any government when it has enough power to spy on its people. IT DOES. Major difference between USA, UK, France, Spain, Sweden etc. Vs Russia, Iran, China, Turkey, North Korea is that you end up in a cell, never to be seen again, tortured for your opinions. I do believe that there are some scountries like India, Pakistan a a couple of others that play in both courts. Semi democratic and semi dictatorial, at the same time..
    - lightgreen 6y ago
      That major difference you mentioned means that the leak will be much more likely in the US, company will try to battle the order in court, the government will think twice before issuing a request to a company, and the net result is spyings are several orders of magnitude less often in western countries (I have no data to back up that statement).
      - HenryBemis 6y ago
        > the government will think twice before issuing a request to a company No, they will definitely not think. Govs/politicians/people in places of power are so arrogant that they will continue the BAU. They will pass another stricter "patriot act/snooper charter", they will issue a tougher gag order, and they will continue as they already do. They will increse the penalties for violators, but they will not stop. The "beast" has a hungry mouth, and it needs that info. When was the last time we saw someone with power just turning the volume down? Never. Only if they get a hard slap in their faces, they pause for a minute, then they change/re-org and continue in a new method/under new legislation, and life goes on. Even in an ideal (human) society (I like to use the "Star Trek TNG" in my examples), someone(s) has absolute power into reading private encrypted messages, and we just see a wise Jean-Luc (Sir Patrick Stewart) that does not abuse his right/privilege. But he does have the access.
        lightgreen 6y ago
        > definitely You are dealing in absolutes. Let me put is way. In dictatorship non-free spy hungry US the cost of making a request to a private company for a government official is much much higher than the same request in for example China. Because of checks and balances and more or less working elections and free press and now the free internet. When request is harder to make, the government makes fewer requests, that’s it.
      - roenxi 6y ago
        > the leak will be much more likely in the US After what has happened to Snowden and Assange? I hope the leakers share your blind optimism. Snowden literally had to flee to Russia, of all the countries in the world, for political asylum.
  - samoa42 6y ago
    u serious?
  - apexalpha 6y ago
    >It was US government agencies, not private companies who were spying. Excuse me? I think we've all seen the Snowden and other leaks that essentially prove that all US companies have no problem handing over direct access to the US government.
stunt 6y ago
> Google is 1000 times more transparent company than ByteDance. It is OK to use US services for non-US countries. Are we talking about freedom of speech? I 100% agree. Otherwise, I don't think Google is a good example. There are actually many bad cases among US and EU companies. Just consider a few blow ups that we had with Google (e.g. Street view), Cicso (the issue with NSA), RSA (also the story about NSA), Facebook scandals, Crypto AG, Gemalto SIM cards, and etc. Are they less evil or more transparent? I don't think so. It's the system that's more transparent in the West not companies. So when something leaks it's more likely that we are informed and it will blow up. If you want to link everything to national security, then obviously domestic services are right choices. But, I'm still against banning and blocking other services. It's just against how I like the world to look like. It also sets a bad standard for other countries to inherit it. You don't want to disconnect the world more than it's now. History shows that it has bad consequences no matter where you are standing. I think the right move would be setting good data protection laws (e.g. GDPR), and educating people about data privacy and help them to understand all the risks that are involved.
- lightgreen 6y ago
  > It's the system that's more transparent in the West not companies Kind of. But also more transparent western system makes private companies behave to avoid making the front page in the next scandal. > Are we talking about freedom of speech? We are talking about the level of public understanding of what’s going on inside the company. What data the company is collecting and where it sends it for example. (Please, note the transparency is not binary: we don’t know everything about Google, but we know much more about Google internals than about ByteDance).

Google is 1000 times more transparent company than ByteDance. It is OK to use US services for non-US countries.

sschueller 6y ago

Says the USA... "You can trust us, we don't listen on your foreign leaders". Come on, that ship has sailed years ago.

lightgreen 6y ago
It was US government agencies, not private companies who were spying. So, to clarify, other countries can use US private company services, but should not blindly trust their secret data to the US government.
- HenryBemis 6y ago
  USA has a track record of issuing a request for info (if not other shadier methods) tied with a gag order. So... and if the Snowden/Wikileaks/ATT room 641A has taught us anything (combined with the 5-9-14 eyes), is that we cannot trust any government when it has enough power to spy on its people. IT DOES. Major difference between USA, UK, France, Spain, Sweden etc. Vs Russia, Iran, China, Turkey, North Korea is that you end up in a cell, never to be seen again, tortured for your opinions. I do believe that there are some scountries like India, Pakistan a a couple of others that play in both courts. Semi democratic and semi dictatorial, at the same time..
  - lightgreen 6y ago
    That major difference you mentioned means that the leak will be much more likely in the US, company will try to battle the order in court, the government will think twice before issuing a request to a company, and the net result is spyings are several orders of magnitude less often in western countries (I have no data to back up that statement).
    - HenryBemis 6y ago
      > the government will think twice before issuing a request to a company No, they will definitely not think. Govs/politicians/people in places of power are so arrogant that they will continue the BAU. They will pass another stricter "patriot act/snooper charter", they will issue a tougher gag order, and they will continue as they already do. They will increse the penalties for violators, but they will not stop. The "beast" has a hungry mouth, and it needs that info. When was the last time we saw someone with power just turning the volume down? Never. Only if they get a hard slap in their faces, they pause for a minute, then they change/re-org and continue in a new method/under new legislation, and life goes on. Even in an ideal (human) society (I like to use the "Star Trek TNG" in my examples), someone(s) has absolute power into reading private encrypted messages, and we just see a wise Jean-Luc (Sir Patrick Stewart) that does not abuse his right/privilege. But he does have the access.
      - lightgreen 6y ago
        > definitely You are dealing in absolutes. Let me put is way. In dictatorship non-free spy hungry US the cost of making a request to a private company for a government official is much much higher than the same request in for example China. Because of checks and balances and more or less working elections and free press and now the free internet. When request is harder to make, the government makes fewer requests, that’s it.
    - roenxi 6y ago
      > the leak will be much more likely in the US After what has happened to Snowden and Assange? I hope the leakers share your blind optimism. Snowden literally had to flee to Russia, of all the countries in the world, for political asylum.
- samoa42 6y ago
  u serious?
- apexalpha 6y ago
  >It was US government agencies, not private companies who were spying. Excuse me? I think we've all seen the Snowden and other leaks that essentially prove that all US companies have no problem handing over direct access to the US government.

stunt 6y ago

> Google is 1000 times more transparent company than ByteDance. It is OK to use US services for non-US countries. Are we talking about freedom of speech? I 100% agree. Otherwise, I don't think Google is a good example. There are actually many bad cases among US and EU companies. Just consider a few blow ups that we had with Google (e.g. Street view), Cicso (the issue with NSA), RSA (also the story about NSA), Facebook scandals, Crypto AG, Gemalto SIM cards, and etc. Are they less evil or more transparent? I don't think so. It's the system that's more transparent in the West not companies. So when something leaks it's more likely that we are informed and it will blow up. If you want to link everything to national security, then obviously domestic services are right choices. But, I'm still against banning and blocking other services. It's just against how I like the world to look like. It also sets a bad standard for other countries to inherit it. You don't want to disconnect the world more than it's now. History shows that it has bad consequences no matter where you are standing. I think the right move would be setting good data protection laws (e.g. GDPR), and educating people about data privacy and help them to understand all the risks that are involved.

lightgreen 6y ago
> It's the system that's more transparent in the West not companies Kind of. But also more transparent western system makes private companies behave to avoid making the front page in the next scandal. > Are we talking about freedom of speech? We are talking about the level of public understanding of what’s going on inside the company. What data the company is collecting and where it sends it for example. (Please, note the transparency is not binary: we don’t know everything about Google, but we know much more about Google internals than about ByteDance).