4 ms·

There are basic human rights, that when breached by a law, make the law a crime. 2010 Google left China for those reasons. Much have changed since then.

threatofrain 6y ago
But Google leaving hasn’t improved the civil rights situation in China. This appears to be a moral matter that is beyond the scope of Googles.
- gostsamo 6y ago
  Yes, but Google are not cooperating in that. If you are witnessing a crime that you cannot stop, does it mean that if the criminal gives you a thousand or even a million dollars, you will help them because the crime will happen anyway?
  - threatofrain 6y ago
    When you make a moral call, do you not forecast a fork in the road where you might choose the morally superior destiny? Or does one merely move moral words without the corresponding conviction to move moral results?
    - gostsamo 6y ago
      Lots of "moral" in your comment and it crowds the meaning for me. If you are accusing me that I'm preaching and not following my own words, that is a big assumption on your side.
      - threatofrain 6y ago
        > 2010 Google left China for those reasons. Much have changed since then. This is what I'm accusing you of. How has Chinese affairs changed for the better after Google?
        sateesh 6y ago
        Not OP. But are you telling since Google's course of action didn't had any impact of altering actions of Chinese government, they (Google) should have stayed put.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
        gostsamo 6y ago
        If you see a man being killed, would you go to the killer and say: "This guy is already dead and nobody can prosecute you because there are no sheriff in the county, but if you pay me, I'll help you with your laundry."? Because the question is not if Google can transform CCP, but if it would take part in its crimes. Unfortunately, there is no God or well-supplied jewish conspiracy that sits above us, knows everything, and can deliver direct consequences for our actions. So, we have a choice to make: to act in our direct interest or act against it and bet on a vague conjecture that a collective sacrifice will deliver a better future for everyone. So, asking if the choice of one changes anything is the wrong question in this case. Of course, all things above are not simple. There is the prisoners dilema "if not me, then someone else will do it", and "if it is me, I can prevent even worse from happening", but there is also the "slippery slope" where making small concessions leads to more and more concessions. So, everyone make there choices and we all leave with the consequences.
- adaml_623 6y ago
  I'm going to disagree with you there. Have civil rights in China improved or worsened? Could they be even worse if Google hadn't left. You're right that this is beyond the scope of Google in the same way that it's beyond the scope of any individual. But together humans can slowly influence other humans and doing the right thing might be a tiny influence but eventually these might add up.
- koshnaranek 6y ago
  We don't know if Google's actions did make them a tiny bit less bad or not
shadowgovt 6y ago
It's always worth remembering: Google couched leaving China in 2010 in humanitarian / ethical terms, but the reason they left was extremely clear: they got hacked internally by Chinese agents using physical access to the intranet. While Google got their security house in order, the most prudent course of action to protect their own company (including their employees) was to cut that physical access. Google restarted business in China around the same time it was able to bring the BeyondCorp initiative online.

threatofrain 6y ago

But Google leaving hasn’t improved the civil rights situation in China. This appears to be a moral matter that is beyond the scope of Googles.

gostsamo 6y ago
Yes, but Google are not cooperating in that. If you are witnessing a crime that you cannot stop, does it mean that if the criminal gives you a thousand or even a million dollars, you will help them because the crime will happen anyway?
- threatofrain 6y ago
  When you make a moral call, do you not forecast a fork in the road where you might choose the morally superior destiny? Or does one merely move moral words without the corresponding conviction to move moral results?
  - gostsamo 6y ago
    Lots of "moral" in your comment and it crowds the meaning for me. If you are accusing me that I'm preaching and not following my own words, that is a big assumption on your side.
    - threatofrain 6y ago
      > 2010 Google left China for those reasons. Much have changed since then. This is what I'm accusing you of. How has Chinese affairs changed for the better after Google?
      - sateesh 6y ago
        Not OP. But are you telling since Google's course of action didn't had any impact of altering actions of Chinese government, they (Google) should have stayed put.
        deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - gostsamo 6y ago
        If you see a man being killed, would you go to the killer and say: "This guy is already dead and nobody can prosecute you because there are no sheriff in the county, but if you pay me, I'll help you with your laundry."? Because the question is not if Google can transform CCP, but if it would take part in its crimes. Unfortunately, there is no God or well-supplied jewish conspiracy that sits above us, knows everything, and can deliver direct consequences for our actions. So, we have a choice to make: to act in our direct interest or act against it and bet on a vague conjecture that a collective sacrifice will deliver a better future for everyone. So, asking if the choice of one changes anything is the wrong question in this case. Of course, all things above are not simple. There is the prisoners dilema "if not me, then someone else will do it", and "if it is me, I can prevent even worse from happening", but there is also the "slippery slope" where making small concessions leads to more and more concessions. So, everyone make there choices and we all leave with the consequences.
adaml_623 6y ago
I'm going to disagree with you there. Have civil rights in China improved or worsened? Could they be even worse if Google hadn't left. You're right that this is beyond the scope of Google in the same way that it's beyond the scope of any individual. But together humans can slowly influence other humans and doing the right thing might be a tiny influence but eventually these might add up.
koshnaranek 6y ago
We don't know if Google's actions did make them a tiny bit less bad or not

shadowgovt 6y ago

It's always worth remembering: Google couched leaving China in 2010 in humanitarian / ethical terms, but the reason they left was extremely clear: they got hacked internally by Chinese agents using physical access to the intranet. While Google got their security house in order, the most prudent course of action to protect their own company (including their employees) was to cut that physical access. Google restarted business in China around the same time it was able to bring the BeyondCorp initiative online.