5 ms·

Excuse my skepticism, but would Google pulling out ACTUALLY do anything? I can understand the argument that innovative businesses don't want anything to do wi

Excuse my skepticism, but would Google pulling out ACTUALLY do anything? I can understand the argument that innovative businesses don't want anything to do with them, but again the Chamber of commerce is an organization aimed at protecting old businesses anyway. They could care less about what innovative businesses think.

nextparadigms 15y ago
It could jumpstart a movement and other companies could join them.
absentbird 15y ago
I am not sure what Google pays in dues but I am willing to bet it is in excess of $100,000 and probably closer to somewhere in 10 digit range. That is a financial blow that would put pressure on them to stop alienating progressive businesses.
- jhamburger 15y ago
  I don't think they pay billions of dollars in dues
- Anechoic 15y ago
  It didn't seem to work when Apple dropped out back in 2009.
mcritz 15y ago
I think the chamber of commerce could care less. They're a force of evil against consumers. If they had it their way there'd still be lead paint on your walls, seatbelts would be optional, and the ingredients of your food would be a mystery.
- davidhollander 15y ago
  >incomethax: They could care less about what innovative businesses think >mcritz: I think the chamber of commerce could care less. I think both of you meant they could "not" care less.
  - ajscherer 15y ago
    It's a common idiomatic expression and I'd be willing to wager that everyone who read it understood what it meant. I'd also wager that most people could really give a shit if it offended a few language prudes.
    - ellyagg 15y ago
      I would usually agree, although not all idiomatic constructions are created equal. I find the "could care less" construction to be as nonsensical and dumb sounding as "irregardless". Moreover, I found your response to be gratuitously offensive as it paired vulgarity with an implied insult to your parent commenter.
      - deleted 15y ago
        [deleted]
      - codyrobbins 15y ago
        It’s not nonsensical, and neither is irregardless. People use them for a reason and they’re both incredibly heavily attested usages. But this argument has already been had before in a million places, including on HN: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=853100 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=853100. Specifically, see my comment about why it’s hard to say that could care less is incorrect: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=854042 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=854042.
        bmelton 15y ago
        I followed those links, and was rewarded with what I believe to be one of the best discussions on HN. Thank you for having taken the time to share that. In hindsight though, I am saddened at how much more often conversations like that used to occur on HN, and how rarely they seem to now.
        ellyagg 15y ago
        I read your linked comment, but I didn't find it persuasive. I'm no language Nazi. It's clear that language pedants are a pet peeve of yours, and that's fine, but language being fluid is not the same thing as language not having boundaries. It also doesn't imply that users of the language can be prevented from having opinions about its usage. We all together decide the standard, as I'm sure you'll agree. Currently, it's still true today that people in educated circles find "could care less" and "irregardless" to be ugly usage. I think there's good reason for that, but I don't plan to make a detailed analysis here. Steven Pinker's analysis notwithstanding, nothing in the linked comment is dispositive. My original comment was not prescriptive. I do not claim to be the ultimate authority of the language because no such authority exists. It's hard for people to imagine, but what constitutes proper English is actually probabilistic. Some stuff is 75% good English and some stuff is 50% good English. Some idioms are more or less good English. I find the constructions under discussion to be less good, and my opinion carries the authority of my fraction of say-so as a member of the English using community. But, frankly, I'm off track. My original point was to call attention to the inappropriate tone of one of the disputants, not participate in more natural language pedantry on the Internet.
adestefan 15y ago
It could be a PR nightmare depending on any of the news outlets actually picking up the story.
jonnathanson 15y ago
As large and powerful as Google is, it's a drop in the bucket compared to the combined punching weight of everyone else involved in the Chamber. A lot of the companies may be old-school, and some of their industries may be dying, but in terms of collective political influence, they're a serious 800-pound gorilla.
- shareme 15y ago
  read the article..Google was not the only company listed of pulling out..

nextparadigms 15y ago

It could jumpstart a movement and other companies could join them.

absentbird 15y ago

I am not sure what Google pays in dues but I am willing to bet it is in excess of $100,000 and probably closer to somewhere in 10 digit range. That is a financial blow that would put pressure on them to stop alienating progressive businesses.

jhamburger 15y ago
I don't think they pay billions of dollars in dues
Anechoic 15y ago
It didn't seem to work when Apple dropped out back in 2009.

mcritz 15y ago

I think the chamber of commerce could care less. They're a force of evil against consumers. If they had it their way there'd still be lead paint on your walls, seatbelts would be optional, and the ingredients of your food would be a mystery.

davidhollander 15y ago
>incomethax: They could care less about what innovative businesses think >mcritz: I think the chamber of commerce could care less. I think both of you meant they could "not" care less.
- ajscherer 15y ago
  It's a common idiomatic expression and I'd be willing to wager that everyone who read it understood what it meant. I'd also wager that most people could really give a shit if it offended a few language prudes.
  - ellyagg 15y ago
    I would usually agree, although not all idiomatic constructions are created equal. I find the "could care less" construction to be as nonsensical and dumb sounding as "irregardless". Moreover, I found your response to be gratuitously offensive as it paired vulgarity with an implied insult to your parent commenter.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
    - codyrobbins 15y ago
      It’s not nonsensical, and neither is irregardless. People use them for a reason and they’re both incredibly heavily attested usages. But this argument has already been had before in a million places, including on HN: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=853100 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=853100. Specifically, see my comment about why it’s hard to say that could care less is incorrect: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=854042 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=854042.
      - bmelton 15y ago
        I followed those links, and was rewarded with what I believe to be one of the best discussions on HN. Thank you for having taken the time to share that. In hindsight though, I am saddened at how much more often conversations like that used to occur on HN, and how rarely they seem to now.
      - ellyagg 15y ago
        I read your linked comment, but I didn't find it persuasive. I'm no language Nazi. It's clear that language pedants are a pet peeve of yours, and that's fine, but language being fluid is not the same thing as language not having boundaries. It also doesn't imply that users of the language can be prevented from having opinions about its usage. We all together decide the standard, as I'm sure you'll agree. Currently, it's still true today that people in educated circles find "could care less" and "irregardless" to be ugly usage. I think there's good reason for that, but I don't plan to make a detailed analysis here. Steven Pinker's analysis notwithstanding, nothing in the linked comment is dispositive. My original comment was not prescriptive. I do not claim to be the ultimate authority of the language because no such authority exists. It's hard for people to imagine, but what constitutes proper English is actually probabilistic. Some stuff is 75% good English and some stuff is 50% good English. Some idioms are more or less good English. I find the constructions under discussion to be less good, and my opinion carries the authority of my fraction of say-so as a member of the English using community. But, frankly, I'm off track. My original point was to call attention to the inappropriate tone of one of the disputants, not participate in more natural language pedantry on the Internet.

adestefan 15y ago

It could be a PR nightmare depending on any of the news outlets actually picking up the story.

jonnathanson 15y ago

As large and powerful as Google is, it's a drop in the bucket compared to the combined punching weight of everyone else involved in the Chamber. A lot of the companies may be old-school, and some of their industries may be dying, but in terms of collective political influence, they're a serious 800-pound gorilla.

shareme 15y ago
read the article..Google was not the only company listed of pulling out..