4 ms·
Depends. When they were struggling with the CCP, eventually getting all their services blocked in Mainland China, I don't think so. There are more examples of s
by 3np 6y ago
Depends. When they were struggling with the CCP, eventually getting all their services blocked in Mainland China, I don't think so. There are more examples of situations were Google really does take the other side of the table. It's not helpful to reducing it to these extremes.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- orestarod 6y agoIf they really wanted to fight for freedoms instead of searching a viable way to have profits in China, they wouldn't secretly start Dragonfly, which was only halted after its employees demanded it. So, they really really did want to operate in China, no matter the human rights situation there, they just did not think it through to concede enough things back then. They were ready later, hence Dragonfly happened.
- 3np 6y agoSure, but that does not mean that their side is always the wrong one on every issue. They can do evil and good at the same time.
- ocdtrekkie 6y agoNot really. They're always evil, it's just occasional their evil coincides with interfering with another evil. Google's issue with China has never really been human rights. Google's issue with China is that it insists on access to data and algorithms, and while Google does not care about your privacy, Google cares a great deal about it's own privacy.
- ogre_codes 6y agoI think current Google would have made a significantly different decision than past Google. It's been a while since I've seen them make an altruistic choice that has cost them significantly the way losing China did.