After Google, Dell and GoDaddy mull pulling out

[oceanx]

For TG to directly take on MD and replace it?? ...

Nay ... I ain't said nothin' about no replacement ... Read my lips!

 

[Sino-PakFriendship]

Google is an American propaganda machine and pro-Independence (Taiwan / Tibet / Xinjiang), Wheel (Falun Gong) and Movement (Democracy Movement).

谷哥是美國宣傳機器, 立場是偏向獨輪運!!!

I am not anti-Democracy Movement, but I am strongly anti-Taiwan / Tibet / Xinjiang independence and Falun Gong!!!

 

[gambit]

The same purpose and end result via slightly different means!

Right...So now you are saying that Google USES the Saudi government to censor its own results. But in China, Google does the censorship. This make no sense.

Just a advice for you, junior, ever thought about changing ur brain?

And based upon your 'reasoning' above, is that it looks like you are young enough to need someone to change your diaper. Get to it, looks like it is full of sh!t.

 

[Speeder 2]

Right...So now you are saying that Google USES the Saudi government to censor its own results. But in China, Google does the censorship. This make no sense.

And based upon your 'reasoning' above, is that it looks like you are young enough to need someone to change your diaper. Get to it, looks like it is full of sh!t.

So it took 1 day for you to figure out a "comeback" with this well known low hand tactic by putting words into my mouth combined with a childish personal attack, which accurately reflects how desperate and slow-minded you really are, doesn't it?

 

[gambit]

So it took 1 day for you to figure out a "comeback"...

This is an anonymous forum. People come and go as they please. The intervals between visits are no way indicative of their abilities to figure out a 'comeback'. Grow up.

...with this well known low hand tactic by putting words into my mouth...

I put no words into your mouth. Here is what you originally said...

http://www.defence.pk/forums/754269-post40.html

Google won't give a hoot about freedom of speech of CHinese people that it says it upholds! Just ask Saudi or all other Arab states where google happily operate under different censors.

There is a categorical difference between someone else doing the censorship versus doing it by oneself. This is about control. By failing to understand or refusing to tell the readership of this difference, you are charging that Google is being hypocritical between China and Saudi Arabia. I showed the readership that this is not true. Showing the factual truth does not constitute putting words into anyone's mouth. In China, Google censored itself in accordance to Chinese laws. In Saudi Arabia and many other countries, Google does not self censored but these governments does for themselves. See the difference? Grow up.

...combined with a childish personal attack, which accurately reflects how desperate and slow-minded you really are, doesn't it?

I was polite to you when I provided a source that proved you wrong. Here is your response to that...

http://www.defence.pk/forums/756077-post84.html

So Google allow Saudis censor its unfiltered contents according to Saudi Law, while in China Google censored itself according to Chinese Law. What's the difference, kid?

Yes, you read it correctly. Yet it seems that your brain fails you.

First...Google has no choice but to 'allow' the Saudi government to censor its results. Google does not control the Saudi government and its various institutions. There is a chasm of a moral and philosophical difference that anyone can see and understand.

Second...Speaking of childish personal attack, what do you see in that response to me proving you wrong? Once someone start, I will respond in kind. You get what you asked for, kid.

 

[gambit]

washingtonpost.com
On Leadership: Views on Google's refusal to continue censorship in China

By On Leadership
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Benjamin W. Heineman Jr. is a business ethics expert and senior fellow at Harvard University's schools of law and government.

Google is not the first company to resolve the conflict between country law and company ethics in favor of ethics. But its highly publicized decision will make companies operating around the globe sensitive to the importance of seeing clearly, before others do, the potential collision of law and ethics and of thinking ahead about how to resolve them in light of company values and stakeholder -- not just shareholder -- pressures.

It will also spotlight companies operating in China and other countries with repressive regimes that take the opposite tack: allowing national law to override the companies' global ethical standards. One example could be Microsoft, whose small search engine, Bing, is trying to gain a foothold in China. Bill Gates is quoted as saying that Microsoft observes the laws of nations where it operates. If so, he hasn't addressed the other side of the equation: important company ethics and values that can trump national law.

What he is asking the public here is that while a corporation has the legal right to suspend its core values in pursuit of profits, is it a moral right to do so when those core values are in conflict with the demands put forth by the situation, which is China? Some persons or organizations can answer the question immediately as 'no', it is not morally right to do so. Some will require time before they answer, which for Google it took years.

As part of the Coro Fellows Program in Public Affairs, Parsa Sobhani is one of 12 Southern California fellows engaged in a graduate-level leadership training program.

I've been Googling Google to see the newest of its many features: a chart displaying its service availability to mainland China in recent days. Google has shocked the business and technology world by "pulling out" of censor-protected China, meaning it is now forwarding users to its Hong Kong servers.

Many characterize the hegemonic power of the tech world by its "do no evil" slogan. However, upon looking closely at Google's initial vision, its founders seek to "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful." While much of the media point to the former slogan as the basis of the power play, one can see that the self-censorship policy simply doesn't align with their business vision. It is not necessarily a purely political decision. Neither is it about human rights -- it's about the sovereignty to do business.

China's censorship policy conflicts with the Google vision to make information universally accessible and useful. Sure, there are political and human rights implications with the decision. But the company's vision highlights an emphasis on free information: Its business service is a human right. As long as the company remains in line with its vision, politics and human rights will go along for the ride. Ball's in your court, Microsoft.

Jimmy Duong is also a Coro fellow.

Despite the monumental importance of the Olympics for China, neutral entities such as the International Olympic Committee backed down when China broke its promise and restricted Internet access for the media. Google, however, has grown strong enough to actually impose disciplinary actions against the Chinese without direct political ramifications.

When an organization has the capacity and courage to act on values that are fundamental to its operations, its leaders must act or risk undermining the group's purpose and foundations. If Google is an organization that believes in net-neutrality, stands for something greater than itself and wants to continue to be a leader in world affairs, it has no choice but to strengthen its resolve and do no evil.

Former congressman Mickey Edwards is vice president of the Aspen Institute.

When is it right for a company to pursue higher profits even when doing so empowers the oppression of a people and the denial of basic human rights?

Never. Not ever. If any corporate executive finds that he or she is considering putting profit ahead of humanity, it is time for that person to reflect seriously on how and when the moral compass, and one's own claim to humanity, got lost.

Cadet Christina Tamayo is one of a group of 13 cadets and four instructors from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point who take on the weekly 'On Leadership' questions.

All powerful business leaders inherit a responsibility to use their power wisely. Along with the power Google enjoys as the No. 1 search engine comes a responsibility to use its influence and business tactics in an ethical manner. Yes, Google employees are people with families, and business deals affect whether someone will have a job at the end of the month, but you have to know where your loyalties lie as a leader before you face decisions like that of Google vs. China. Are you loyal to the well-being of your employees or that of human-rights-deprived people half a world away?

No one in IT who has any understanding of politics and morality swallowed the Chinese government's line about protecting China from ****. Between extreme **** and extreme politics, if Google has to make a choice of self censorship, it would be extreme **** that would be censored. Dictatorships fear extreme politics more than anything else.

 

[gambit]

I am not saying Google is not a great companies. when it comes to china's market, it's different case. Baidu developed a number of successful products which chinese netizens like. Google want to achieve the same level of success by copying.

But not at the core technology level.

Robin did learn lot from the US, but technology is not the whole story. what distinguish baidu from its rivals is their market-oriented products and service and their innovation ideas.

And Baidu's willingness to comply with the government's wishes.