While I agree in principle with this article's point that non-voting stock makes more likely the possibility of an iron-clad grip by irresponsible dictators, I

While I agree in principle with this article's point that non-voting stock makes more likely the possibility of an iron-clad grip by irresponsible dictators, I don't think it is unconscionable or "evil" in Google's case. Much of the innovation that I appreciate most coming from Google appears financially irresponsible from the outside looking in. When Google first went public my concern was that it would lose its ability to have its engineers working on hundreds of long-shot projects with no projected revenues, and a management that is open and accepting of innovation in all of its forms. If the decision-makers at Google were only interested in squeezing the most out of Google's bottom line, then there would be strong arguments to shut all of that down, which I think would be unconscionable: a massive waste of potential, on a scale that only a multi-billion dollar corporation can be capable of.