3 ms·
> 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 10
by 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).