3 ms·

Sentator Warren has made most of her career lashing out and taking action against out of control corporations. Google just happens to be the corporation most ou

Sentator Warren has made most of her career lashing out and taking action against out of control corporations. Google just happens to be the corporation most out of control (Alphabet really). Politicians are supposed to represent their constituents. I only wish my senator was as passionately outspoken as Senator Warren. It's ok for lawmakers to dislike a specific corporations and make specific laws against that corporation. Matter of fact, many on HN (self included) would be well represented by a politician introducing law to specifically disband Alphabet. > The government has a lot of power, and often for good reason, but that power can only be respected when it is wielded dispassionately, not to settle personal scores. Than how should the people settle scores against these companies? Do you recommend torches or pitchforks? I thought law makers representing the people and passing popular laws was a more democractic way? I don't know if you work at google but no one (except a few extremists) had suggested anything more than a profit loss for your company. To clarify further, I have severe disdain against google due to their arrogance pattern of very dangerous and harmful anti-consent activites that undermines the very concept of individual freedom.

mythrwy 6y ago
"Settling Scores" is a very strange term to use. I don't think the law is for settling scores.
- badrabbit 6y ago
  Yes it is. Justice is setting scores with legitimate authority. I wouldn't use the term but despite hyperboles used in the parent comment this sort of thing is very common. HN would be cheering Sen. Warren if it was Exxon and the subject was climate change. Large Corporations when committing crimes tend to commit special and unique crimes. Replace Google with Al-Qaeda and you will see why,except this is white collar tech crime not kinetic terrorism.
  - Nasrudith 6y ago
    The law is for crimes or civil matters not petty grudges implied by score. You might have a score to settle with a (former) friend for sleeping with your sibling as a breach in etiquette but that isn't a matter for the law. Score is too expansice a term. Apply it in politicians context and the abuses become horrifying as in "we testified before congress that the bill was an ill considered mess so now face retaliation". Allowing that strong arming is not justice.

mythrwy 6y ago

"Settling Scores" is a very strange term to use. I don't think the law is for settling scores.

badrabbit 6y ago
Yes it is. Justice is setting scores with legitimate authority. I wouldn't use the term but despite hyperboles used in the parent comment this sort of thing is very common. HN would be cheering Sen. Warren if it was Exxon and the subject was climate change. Large Corporations when committing crimes tend to commit special and unique crimes. Replace Google with Al-Qaeda and you will see why,except this is white collar tech crime not kinetic terrorism.
- Nasrudith 6y ago
  The law is for crimes or civil matters not petty grudges implied by score. You might have a score to settle with a (former) friend for sleeping with your sibling as a breach in etiquette but that isn't a matter for the law. Score is too expansice a term. Apply it in politicians context and the abuses become horrifying as in "we testified before congress that the bill was an ill considered mess so now face retaliation". Allowing that strong arming is not justice.