7 ms·

> Maybe letting a single internet company "organize the world's information" probably isn't such a great idea. Some food for thought. When put like this, the t

> Maybe letting a single internet company "organize the world's information" probably isn't such a great idea. Some food for thought. When put like this, the thought that one company controls virtually all information flow on the Internet is more than mildly terrifying.

cratermoon 5y ago
Yes, and a dozen or two people, mostly white males, control the company.
- nusaru 5y ago
  > mostly white males What is this supposed to imply, exactly?
  - sidlls 5y ago
    An extreme reading: white men of the past and (some) of the present were/are racist, therefore we all are. It should go without saying that (probably) isn't a charitable reading.
    - systemvoltage 5y ago
      It boggles my mind how we went from a google search result to white supremacy. I'd like people to please exercise restraint, the world feels like it is falling apart where every conversation becomes political/racial. If this is going on HN, I wonder how it is elsewhere.
      - sidlls 5y ago
        Yeah, it’s a bit much. The “extreme” reading is slowly becoming the only acceptable one. Partly because of comments like the one precipitating the thread: there’s no good reason to try to connect these items.
        cratermoon 5y ago
        I never said they were racist. What does it mean that someone would assume I meant that?
        sidlls 5y ago
        It probably doesn’t mean what you think or are trying to imply.
  - brinfan 5y ago
    He's pointing out that Larry page and sergey brin are both Jewish, its a common antisemitic / alt right "dog whistle".
    - z3ncyberpunk 5y ago
      whining about white people is the tactic of modern woke radical leftists, definitely not alt right who would gladly love all the white representation to further their own racist agenda. idk where you got that dumb thought from
    - Tenoke 5y ago
      The 'white males are the enemy of the people' is such a leftist trope that it's almost hard for me to believe someone thinks it's an alt right dog whistle.
      - brinfan 5y ago
        Yeah I'm just having a laugh, hn will unperson this account in a moment.
      - fungiblecog 5y ago
        It's the old correlation/causation problem. Being white is at the present time in history correlated wih privilege. But being white isn't the problem. The problem is how the privileged use it to lock out everyone else from the benefits they enjoy. Race and such like are irrelevant distractions.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- gundmc 5y ago
  I'm not sure what the implication here is, but regardless it doesn't seem to be true. According to this source, only 3 of the 10 "key people" are white and male. https://craft.co/alphabet/executives https://craft.co/alphabet/executives
  - cratermoon 5y ago
    Board members don't have the direct control that you think. Neither do all the C-level officers. It's a basic fact of organizations that people that make the key decisions aren't necessarily the ones with the titles.
- vecplane 5y ago
  Is Sundar Pichai a white male?
  - nasmorn 5y ago
    I think he is so rich now he can basically be considered white for purposes of discussing his privilege.
    - read_if_gay_ 5y ago
      A trans-white. Are poor whites trans-black then?
    - rcoveson 5y ago
      What a take! "Success and non-whiteness are incompatible." For the purpose of discussing the lack of privilege of homeless people, should we consider them black? It's almost as if race is just a confusing distraction in conversations about privilege!
      - sophacles 5y ago
        What a take! Here's some mic spam I heard the other day when gaming: "There's all sorts of N*s - light brown, dark brown, even white ones. ...<other examples>... and even the homeless guy on the corner is a N" It's not the first time I've heard this sentiment, and presumably not the last. Perhaps race (and gender, sexuality, wealth, etc) are related to privilege. I mean they are used to justify why entire groups of people deserve more or less privilege. Maybe those things are aren't "just a confusing distraction" but their associated 'isms' drive the issue of privilege. Or maybe they are divisions used to distract from the privileges as you say. Either way, dismissing race as just a distraction, that is to treat different facets of a bigger problem as unrelated, seems like an attempt to quash any discussion of the whole.
        rcoveson 5y ago
        > ...he can basically be considered white for purposes of discussing his privilege. This is a distraction, and a confusing one. Calling that out is not an "attempt to quash any discussion". Let's discuss race when race is relevant, and the other 90% of the time let's discuss economic privilege.
- Huwyt_Nashi046 5y ago
  Are the White men in the room with us right now? Do they hide under your bed and in your closet? Boo!
3pt14159 5y ago
It seems that they do, but they don't. Plenty of information flows through emails, chat, social media, direct search on websites like Amazon. The internet is large, and Google is a very big player, but they're not controlling all the information flow on the internet, and if they really tried people would leave.
- warkdarrior 5y ago
  > they're not controlling all the information flow on the internet, and if they really tried people would leave. I am not sure about that. People are generally slow to change habits, especially that Google's control will not grow in a sudden fashion, but rather incrementally.
- haswell 5y ago
  That Google controls/censors information is well established [0]. The side effects of their search algorithms and how they control the flow of information has also been a topic of regular discussion/scrutiny for many years (just one example here [1]) > and if they really tried people would leave Where would they go? - [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google - [1] https://mindmatters.ai/2019/07/google-engineer-reveals-search-engine-bias/ https://mindmatters.ai/2019/07/google-engineer-reveals-searc...
  - minsc__and__boo 5y ago
    I know you're trying to make a point about censorship existing, but I'm not sure if loli porn and scam online pharmacies were really contributing to the internet.
    - haswell 5y ago
      I agree with you; however, that's kind of the point. Google has the power to organize and control a significant amount of information. These statements are very different: - Google doesn't censor anything - Google censors things that a lot of people agree are offensive The 2nd gets into tricky territory, because not everyone agrees on what is/is not offensive. I happen to think that most of the things they remove are probably good to remove. But the implication is still that Google wields (and at times uses) enormous power. Things get even more grey (and potentially problematic) when you get into ranking algorithms, which have the power to sway opinions on major topics/events. And as you mentioned, my parent comment is also a response to the very direct (and incorrect) claim: > It seems that they do [control information], but they don't.
TeeMassive 5y ago
Luckily for me, my name is the same as a formerly popular folk musician who lived near my hometown and made songs whose titles had my hometown's name in it. And let's not forget credentials. How many accounts depend on your GMail address? I don't know for you, but for me it encompasses most of the aspect of my life from banking to video games. Which reminds me of this story: https://archive.is/EVrDv https://archive.is/EVrDv > In the space of one hour, my entire digital life was destroyed. First my Google account was taken over, then deleted. Next my Twitter account was compromised, and used as a platform to broadcast racist and homophobic messages. And worst of all, my AppleID account was broken into, and my hackers used it to remotely erase all of the data on my iPhone, iPad, and MacBook.

cratermoon 5y ago

Yes, and a dozen or two people, mostly white males, control the company.

nusaru 5y ago
> mostly white males What is this supposed to imply, exactly?
- sidlls 5y ago
  An extreme reading: white men of the past and (some) of the present were/are racist, therefore we all are. It should go without saying that (probably) isn't a charitable reading.
  - systemvoltage 5y ago
    It boggles my mind how we went from a google search result to white supremacy. I'd like people to please exercise restraint, the world feels like it is falling apart where every conversation becomes political/racial. If this is going on HN, I wonder how it is elsewhere.
    - sidlls 5y ago
      Yeah, it’s a bit much. The “extreme” reading is slowly becoming the only acceptable one. Partly because of comments like the one precipitating the thread: there’s no good reason to try to connect these items.
      - cratermoon 5y ago
        I never said they were racist. What does it mean that someone would assume I meant that?
        sidlls 5y ago
        It probably doesn’t mean what you think or are trying to imply.
- brinfan 5y ago
  He's pointing out that Larry page and sergey brin are both Jewish, its a common antisemitic / alt right "dog whistle".
  - z3ncyberpunk 5y ago
    whining about white people is the tactic of modern woke radical leftists, definitely not alt right who would gladly love all the white representation to further their own racist agenda. idk where you got that dumb thought from
  - Tenoke 5y ago
    The 'white males are the enemy of the people' is such a leftist trope that it's almost hard for me to believe someone thinks it's an alt right dog whistle.
    - brinfan 5y ago
      Yeah I'm just having a laugh, hn will unperson this account in a moment.
    - fungiblecog 5y ago
      It's the old correlation/causation problem. Being white is at the present time in history correlated wih privilege. But being white isn't the problem. The problem is how the privileged use it to lock out everyone else from the benefits they enjoy. Race and such like are irrelevant distractions.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
gundmc 5y ago
I'm not sure what the implication here is, but regardless it doesn't seem to be true. According to this source, only 3 of the 10 "key people" are white and male. https://craft.co/alphabet/executives https://craft.co/alphabet/executives
- cratermoon 5y ago
  Board members don't have the direct control that you think. Neither do all the C-level officers. It's a basic fact of organizations that people that make the key decisions aren't necessarily the ones with the titles.
vecplane 5y ago
Is Sundar Pichai a white male?
- nasmorn 5y ago
  I think he is so rich now he can basically be considered white for purposes of discussing his privilege.
  - read_if_gay_ 5y ago
    A trans-white. Are poor whites trans-black then?
  - rcoveson 5y ago
    What a take! "Success and non-whiteness are incompatible." For the purpose of discussing the lack of privilege of homeless people, should we consider them black? It's almost as if race is just a confusing distraction in conversations about privilege!
    - sophacles 5y ago
      What a take! Here's some mic spam I heard the other day when gaming: "There's all sorts of N*s - light brown, dark brown, even white ones. ...<other examples>... and even the homeless guy on the corner is a N" It's not the first time I've heard this sentiment, and presumably not the last. Perhaps race (and gender, sexuality, wealth, etc) are related to privilege. I mean they are used to justify why entire groups of people deserve more or less privilege. Maybe those things are aren't "just a confusing distraction" but their associated 'isms' drive the issue of privilege. Or maybe they are divisions used to distract from the privileges as you say. Either way, dismissing race as just a distraction, that is to treat different facets of a bigger problem as unrelated, seems like an attempt to quash any discussion of the whole.
      - rcoveson 5y ago
        > ...he can basically be considered white for purposes of discussing his privilege. This is a distraction, and a confusing one. Calling that out is not an "attempt to quash any discussion". Let's discuss race when race is relevant, and the other 90% of the time let's discuss economic privilege.
Huwyt_Nashi046 5y ago
Are the White men in the room with us right now? Do they hide under your bed and in your closet? Boo!

3pt14159 5y ago

It seems that they do, but they don't. Plenty of information flows through emails, chat, social media, direct search on websites like Amazon. The internet is large, and Google is a very big player, but they're not controlling all the information flow on the internet, and if they really tried people would leave.

warkdarrior 5y ago
> they're not controlling all the information flow on the internet, and if they really tried people would leave. I am not sure about that. People are generally slow to change habits, especially that Google's control will not grow in a sudden fashion, but rather incrementally.
haswell 5y ago
That Google controls/censors information is well established [0]. The side effects of their search algorithms and how they control the flow of information has also been a topic of regular discussion/scrutiny for many years (just one example here [1]) > and if they really tried people would leave Where would they go? - [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google - [1] https://mindmatters.ai/2019/07/google-engineer-reveals-search-engine-bias/ https://mindmatters.ai/2019/07/google-engineer-reveals-searc...
- minsc__and__boo 5y ago
  I know you're trying to make a point about censorship existing, but I'm not sure if loli porn and scam online pharmacies were really contributing to the internet.
  - haswell 5y ago
    I agree with you; however, that's kind of the point. Google has the power to organize and control a significant amount of information. These statements are very different: - Google doesn't censor anything - Google censors things that a lot of people agree are offensive The 2nd gets into tricky territory, because not everyone agrees on what is/is not offensive. I happen to think that most of the things they remove are probably good to remove. But the implication is still that Google wields (and at times uses) enormous power. Things get even more grey (and potentially problematic) when you get into ranking algorithms, which have the power to sway opinions on major topics/events. And as you mentioned, my parent comment is also a response to the very direct (and incorrect) claim: > It seems that they do [control information], but they don't.

TeeMassive 5y ago

Luckily for me, my name is the same as a formerly popular folk musician who lived near my hometown and made songs whose titles had my hometown's name in it. And let's not forget credentials. How many accounts depend on your GMail address? I don't know for you, but for me it encompasses most of the aspect of my life from banking to video games. Which reminds me of this story: https://archive.is/EVrDv https://archive.is/EVrDv > In the space of one hour, my entire digital life was destroyed. First my Google account was taken over, then deleted. Next my Twitter account was compromised, and used as a platform to broadcast racist and homophobic messages. And worst of all, my AppleID account was broken into, and my hackers used it to remotely erase all of the data on my iPhone, iPad, and MacBook.