3 ms·

My point was that you miss-represented the scenario: Google has not been ordered by the President to do anything, because the president doesn't have that author

My point was that you miss-represented the scenario: Google has not been ordered by the President to do anything, because the president doesn't have that authority. Your dishonest redirecting here is both transparent and insulting. Whether Mexico or the US is more "liberal and respectful of free speech" is neither relevant to this conversation or to my prior comment.

unyttigfjelltol 2y ago
The reality is none of us can confidently declare things as unequivocally as you do. Google knows best what their risk profile is. Mexico threatens to sue and yet you are so confident the US could not do the same? Maybe there's a federal contract in the mix, or maybe users are federal contractors. Google is an institution, figuratively speaking. Maybe being a globally-significant provider, Google has seen the trajectory similar disputes in dredging quasi-legal cruft like official interference with their services. Maybe they recognize that once you abandon democratic decision-making, you are adrift, and that's not a place they wish to be.
- Gerardo1 2y ago
  > The reality is none of us can confidently declare things as unequivocally as you do. You can absolutely confidently declare that Google has not been ordered to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico. First, because that hasn't happened, and second, because the President doesn't have the authority to do that. You're retreating from your claim. Google isn't "just following orders", they made a calculated decision.