3 ms·

I agree “don’t be evil” is pretty naive, as if the world were so black and white. Do you believe the current state is problematic though? I don’t see what’s s

by gretch 3y ago

I agree “don’t be evil” is pretty naive, as if the world were so black and white. Do you believe the current state is problematic though? I don’t see what’s so wrong with showing each country their preferred map, as regulated. Who is being harmed? Also, wouldn’t it be weird for some international megacorp to start meddling in geopolitics by drawing lines the “right” way?

saiya-jin 3y ago
Well, what do you show to the rest of the world? I have seen and personally visited such places so I know about dotted lines, but its hard to not take any form of side and be truly neutral, even for google (it wasnt in places I checked).
- euos 3y ago
  I think every country has recognized map of other countries. E.g. US has officially recognized borders of Ukraine.
  - tourmalinetaco 3y ago
    Those aren’t neutral either, however. The only way to be neutral in this regard would be to show not just the recognized borders and specifying that they’re not agreed upon, but show WHY they’re recognized (NATO consideration, anti-Russian sentiment in USA politicians, etc).
    - josephg 3y ago
      Google has no obligation to be politically neutral. Even if they wanted political neutrality, it’s often an impossible goal to achieve in practice.
      - mcculley 3y ago
        Indeed. Corporations whose shareholders expect them to extract profits from all countries have to accept that they cannot be politically neutral. They must put profit ahead of principle.
        josephg 3y ago
        Profits ahead of what principle? It’s not virtuous to be neutral. Are you neutral on free speech? What does that even mean? Are you “neutral” on the oppression of women or lgbt people? On women in the workforce? On respect for the elderly? Values are like accents. Only people who haven’t travelled can convince themselves that they don’t have an accent - or that their value system is somehow globally “neutral”.
        mcculley 3y ago
        I never suggested neutrality. Quite the opposite. Yes, those of us who have traveled are quite aware that it would make sense to provide an option in the UI to show something other than what the local government wants us to see. My point remains. Google has no other option. They obey the jurisdictions from which they derive profits.
  - mistrial9 3y ago
    no you are wrong - there are declared areas of dispute, and then those are also disputed. The world is a big place.
roenxi 3y ago
Even in a world of greys, there is light grey and dark grey. "Don't be evil" is an aspiration to acknowledge that principles exist and it would be better to adhere to them. Although obviously a company like Google isn't capable of doing that. Although this doesn't count as evil. Showing locally adjusted maps is hardly even a light grey zone. If the authorities in country A say the border is there, draw it there when producing maps for that country. It is not complicated and it is a silly place to pick a fight - Google would lose if they lost and do nothing useful for anyone if they won. Nobody cares where Google thinks the borders are, they don't have an army and we do have VPNs.
- mistrial9 3y ago
  > Nobody cares where Google thinks the borders are there was a documented instance of a military action in Columbia-region IIR that allegedly relied on Google Maps. It is easy to see misinformation, but also easy to see actually low-literacy armed people doing something aggressive Once Again, relying on something that is easy to use.
  - gretch 3y ago
    What I see is a warmongering administration that wanted to go to war and was going to pick any reason to do so. Yes Google was the convenient excuse, but if Google didn’t do that, they would have found the next excuse. Let’s look at the Russia situation now. Google didn’t draw Ukraine as part of Russia. And yet Putin found some reasons anyway.
- estebarb 3y ago
  Well like 13 years ago Nicaragua invaded part of Costa Rica, in part claiming that Google Maps put that land in their territory. https://www.wired.com/2010/11/google-maps-error-blamed-for-nicaraguan-invasion/ https://www.wired.com/2010/11/google-maps-error-blamed-for-n...
  - roenxi 3y ago
    Both as a joke but also in seriousness: if the Nicaraguan army can't figure out where the border is, how is Google meant to know? In practice a key part of the army's job to decide where the border is. The commander is scapegoating to hide his own incompetence. Google's mapping may have contributed, but the lack of demarcation showing where the border is would have been a bigger issue. If the Google Maps aspect was enough to end up in the wrong country it was going to happen without Google being involved.
paint 3y ago
Wouldn't be the first time: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/world/europe/elon-musk-ukraine-starlink-drones.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/world/europe/elon-musk-uk...
mcculley 3y ago
Where censorship is occurring, I think it would be better for Google to show that different representations exist and allow the user to pick from them. I realize they they cannot implement such a feature without losing out on revenue from at least one of those jurisdictions.
- gretch 3y ago
  > allow the user to pick from them This is basically what happens now because it goes by what the government says and the government is representative of the people. You might be tempted to say oh but some governments are despotic and don’t represent the people. Sure maybe, but it’s not Googles place to determine when that is or isn’t true. And if did try to do that, I’m sure there be criticism of sowing revolution or something
  - mcculley 3y ago
    We are in agreement that Google is limited by what is legal. This is what I originally wrote. If they want profits from both jurisdictions, they will not make a principled decision.
    - gretch 3y ago
      They are making a principled decision: The principle is: follow the laws of the countries you operate in. You seem to be under the impression that Google should be the arbiter of true moral right and subvert what Governments have decided for their nations.
      - mcculley 3y ago
        That is not what I wrote.

by gretch 3y ago

saiya-jin 3y ago

Well, what do you show to the rest of the world? I have seen and personally visited such places so I know about dotted lines, but its hard to not take any form of side and be truly neutral, even for google (it wasnt in places I checked).

euos 3y ago
I think every country has recognized map of other countries. E.g. US has officially recognized borders of Ukraine.
- tourmalinetaco 3y ago
  Those aren’t neutral either, however. The only way to be neutral in this regard would be to show not just the recognized borders and specifying that they’re not agreed upon, but show WHY they’re recognized (NATO consideration, anti-Russian sentiment in USA politicians, etc).
  - josephg 3y ago
    Google has no obligation to be politically neutral. Even if they wanted political neutrality, it’s often an impossible goal to achieve in practice.
    - mcculley 3y ago
      Indeed. Corporations whose shareholders expect them to extract profits from all countries have to accept that they cannot be politically neutral. They must put profit ahead of principle.
      - josephg 3y ago
        Profits ahead of what principle? It’s not virtuous to be neutral. Are you neutral on free speech? What does that even mean? Are you “neutral” on the oppression of women or lgbt people? On women in the workforce? On respect for the elderly? Values are like accents. Only people who haven’t travelled can convince themselves that they don’t have an accent - or that their value system is somehow globally “neutral”.
        mcculley 3y ago
        I never suggested neutrality. Quite the opposite. Yes, those of us who have traveled are quite aware that it would make sense to provide an option in the UI to show something other than what the local government wants us to see. My point remains. Google has no other option. They obey the jurisdictions from which they derive profits.
- mistrial9 3y ago
  no you are wrong - there are declared areas of dispute, and then those are also disputed. The world is a big place.

roenxi 3y ago

Even in a world of greys, there is light grey and dark grey. "Don't be evil" is an aspiration to acknowledge that principles exist and it would be better to adhere to them. Although obviously a company like Google isn't capable of doing that. Although this doesn't count as evil. Showing locally adjusted maps is hardly even a light grey zone. If the authorities in country A say the border is there, draw it there when producing maps for that country. It is not complicated and it is a silly place to pick a fight - Google would lose if they lost and do nothing useful for anyone if they won. Nobody cares where Google thinks the borders are, they don't have an army and we do have VPNs.

mistrial9 3y ago
> Nobody cares where Google thinks the borders are there was a documented instance of a military action in Columbia-region IIR that allegedly relied on Google Maps. It is easy to see misinformation, but also easy to see actually low-literacy armed people doing something aggressive Once Again, relying on something that is easy to use.
- gretch 3y ago
  What I see is a warmongering administration that wanted to go to war and was going to pick any reason to do so. Yes Google was the convenient excuse, but if Google didn’t do that, they would have found the next excuse. Let’s look at the Russia situation now. Google didn’t draw Ukraine as part of Russia. And yet Putin found some reasons anyway.
estebarb 3y ago
Well like 13 years ago Nicaragua invaded part of Costa Rica, in part claiming that Google Maps put that land in their territory. https://www.wired.com/2010/11/google-maps-error-blamed-for-nicaraguan-invasion/ https://www.wired.com/2010/11/google-maps-error-blamed-for-n...
- roenxi 3y ago
  Both as a joke but also in seriousness: if the Nicaraguan army can't figure out where the border is, how is Google meant to know? In practice a key part of the army's job to decide where the border is. The commander is scapegoating to hide his own incompetence. Google's mapping may have contributed, but the lack of demarcation showing where the border is would have been a bigger issue. If the Google Maps aspect was enough to end up in the wrong country it was going to happen without Google being involved.

paint 3y ago

Wouldn't be the first time: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/world/europe/elon-musk-ukraine-starlink-drones.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/world/europe/elon-musk-uk...

mcculley 3y ago

Where censorship is occurring, I think it would be better for Google to show that different representations exist and allow the user to pick from them. I realize they they cannot implement such a feature without losing out on revenue from at least one of those jurisdictions.

gretch 3y ago
> allow the user to pick from them This is basically what happens now because it goes by what the government says and the government is representative of the people. You might be tempted to say oh but some governments are despotic and don’t represent the people. Sure maybe, but it’s not Googles place to determine when that is or isn’t true. And if did try to do that, I’m sure there be criticism of sowing revolution or something
- mcculley 3y ago
  We are in agreement that Google is limited by what is legal. This is what I originally wrote. If they want profits from both jurisdictions, they will not make a principled decision.
  - gretch 3y ago
    They are making a principled decision: The principle is: follow the laws of the countries you operate in. You seem to be under the impression that Google should be the arbiter of true moral right and subvert what Governments have decided for their nations.
    - mcculley 3y ago
      That is not what I wrote.