If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   Google realizes the evil route is more profitable. CEO's of Exxon, Halliburton, Ronco nod knowingly   (today.reuters.com) divider line 95
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

15395 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jun 2006 at 5:16 PM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



95 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-06-09 05:19:37 PM
Ronco IS evil
 
2006-06-09 05:19:51 PM
How is this "evil"? Google abides by US censorship regulations too.
 
2006-06-09 05:20:04 PM
"bo knows jabbatheslut wants his html abilities back!"
 
2006-06-09 05:20:07 PM
Old and busted: "Don't be evil."

New Hotness: Corporate Greed.
 
2006-06-09 05:20:09 PM
Ronco?

but, but, but, the Showtime...
 
2006-06-09 05:20:38 PM
"How is this "evil"? Google abides by US censorship regulations too."

Man, if you like apples, you'll looooove oranges.
 
2006-06-09 05:20:44 PM
4 easy payments of

shut the fark up

Ronco is worse than walmart
 
2006-06-09 05:21:11 PM
media.libsyn.com
 
2006-06-09 05:21:39 PM
wildsilverfox: Ronco IS evil

If by evil, you mean the ability to set it and forget it, then yes, Ronco is evil.

/hates that infomercial.
 
2006-06-09 05:22:04 PM
The food dehydrator is a tool of corporate evil. Do not give in to their delicious shriveled meats.
 
2006-06-09 05:23:07 PM
by the way,i worked for one of haliburton's comapnies in iraq for 6 months.it would be a great company if one could get rid of all the red tape.the red tape is what costs! not the work they are doing in helping the armed forces and helping to rebuild iraq.all the good they do,is offset by their red tape.the red tape drives the costs of those projects up,not the projects themselves!
 
2006-06-09 05:23:30 PM
If you are a normal Chinese user and you want to use Google, just go to google.com and you actually won't get good service.

Well there's a rousing advertisement for his own company.
 
2006-06-09 05:24:03 PM
So, Google, now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb!
 
2006-06-09 05:24:06 PM
Submitter is under the assumption that the USA is a "free" country; but the freedom our forefathers envisioned no longer exists. It was bled from us little by little through one passed law at a time. Do you seriously think the government does not restrict or monitor our use of the internet?
 
2006-06-09 05:24:41 PM
Halliburton is not evil.



/loves fat pay checks
 
2006-06-09 05:24:42 PM
"If you are a normal Chinese user and you want to use Google, just go to google.com and you actually won't get good service.

then

The vast majority of Web users inside China -- 99 percent, he said -- use Google.com rather than Google.cn at this time.


that is horrid.
 
2006-06-09 05:26:39 PM
The meat they use on the set it and forget it infomercial is orphaned puppy meat that was three days from retirement and also a nun.
 
2006-06-09 05:27:34 PM
Well, a little FARK censorship is all we need right now...jabbatheslut is threadjacking as per normal...why hasn't he been banned from commenting yet?. Let's see a little bit of free market action here, mods!
 
2006-06-09 05:27:55 PM
www.acsu.buffalo.edu
"Now you see, Google, that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb"
 
2006-06-09 05:28:49 PM
google is very evil, the bow to the barks of scientology

search for xenu, then scroll down to where they let you know they removed a link at the request of the "church" of scientology.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=xenu&btnG=Google+Search

google is very evil indeed ....

:P
 
2006-06-09 05:28:56 PM
"If you are a normal Chinese user and you want to use Google, just go to google.com and you actually won't get good service. What? Its the internet. Does the net in China prevent fast connection to US based sites or something?
And why do they have to base it in China? Cant they just make a webpage in the US that uses Chinese text and make it Google.cu or does the server have to actually be there to change the .X part?

As far as the censorship thing goes. Yeah it sucks for the Chinese people but they are pretty smart and can learn to surf the .com based websites to avoid censorship. Companies have to abide by local regulations, thats just how it works. Im not saying its justified though.
 
2006-06-09 05:29:09 PM
Oops, didn't see your post there, emnar... But I have l33t img tag skills, so I'm awesomer than you.

/just kidding
//also has l33t slashy skills
 
2006-06-09 05:29:27 PM
Cerebral Ballsy
Do you seriously think the government does not restrict or monitor our use of the internet?

Restrict, no. Monitor, yes.

How do you think it's being restricted? If I don't see a followup post, I'll assume the Man got you.
 
2006-06-09 05:29:42 PM
You know, this is based purely on greed. They want to have a presence in China so that they can make money on ad revenue. That is why they're cooperating with China on censorship.

But they don't have to. They're successful enough to keep their principals. But hey, you can never have enough money right?

/greedy bastards
//it was inevetable.
 
2006-06-09 05:29:57 PM
Those bastards at Ronco put my fledling company out of business. We bought and re-sold Paid Programing TV time and sold a bunch of time blocks from stations around the country to Ronco. They ran on the stations, then went around us to pay the stations directly for the airtime (after telling lies to us about the checks having been sent, check numbers, etc).

So, Ronco is guilty of Dirty Pool. And the stations couldn't care less (they got paid the price I negotiated, so why would they?) Serves me right for trusting them, I guess...
 
2006-06-09 05:32:49 PM
NotANinjaJustABox: What? Its the internet. Does the net in China prevent fast connection to US based sites or something?

If you RTFA, you'll note:
Chinese Internet service providers take steps to ensure that the uncensored google.com site does not work as intended
 
2006-06-09 05:32:54 PM
"It's not evil as long as we're the ones doing it..."
 
2006-06-09 05:32:57 PM
So... if you want to influence China's policies for the better, don't you have to be in China? There is always compromise, even with overbearing patronizing gummint policies.

So... China "intereferes" with google.com, but they allow it? What dat mean?
 
2006-06-09 05:33:40 PM
"Submitter is under the assumption that the USA is a "free" country..."

I'm the submitter, and no, I'm not. I -am- under the impression that Google's remarkably successful corporate ethics statement/PR device is full of shiat, which is why I submitted the article. Plus I was a little annoyed the other day when Brin said that they were "thinking about" pulling out of China and half the internet seemed to say "oh, all right then, we trust you to do the right thing. Off we go on our merry way, lalalala...". Please.
 
2006-06-09 05:34:12 PM
NCg8r

Gusss they decided that is they could eliminate the middleman, they could make more profit. Funny how that works.

/is what they did actually illegal, or just underhanded and dirty?
 
2006-06-09 05:34:33 PM
angryflower.com
 
2006-06-09 05:34:50 PM
popain

What teh fark!? How is the freaking chuch of scientfarkingtology getting away with so much shiat? That's crazy.
 
2006-06-09 05:35:29 PM
yo bobovski,why do you want me banned?have i offended you in some way?
 
2006-06-09 05:36:59 PM
Future headline: "Google is farking killed! Steve Ballmer unavailable for comment."
 
2006-06-09 05:38:24 PM
What's wrong with Ronco? My 'showtime rotisserrie' kicks ass.
 
2006-06-09 05:38:48 PM
Dammit, I_Hate_Iowa, it just looks right. Look: 1) CEOs 2) CEO's. I'm willing to break my English teacher's heart to get the sexy look of #2. Wait...
 
2006-06-09 05:38:58 PM
jabbatheslut

I actually wrote what I did before you posted your later on-topic (sorta) comment. Ya gotta stop with the pleading for your HTML privileges back, though. It's kind of embarassing.
 
2006-06-09 05:40:23 PM

/is what they did actually illegal, or just underhanded and dirty?


Probably the latter. I don't know how they figured out the rate we negotiated at the stations, but they did. The likely lied to the stations' billing departments.

We had written agreements with "electronic signatures" (meaning they signed the doc and faxed it back over), but there is no way we could afford legal representation on the deal. Essentially wasted several weeks' worth of research, negotiations, and paperwork/phonework.

After that, we stopped doing business with them, and never found another Client that would consistently do business with us. We were WAY over our heads, to be sure, but that doesn't excuse the dirty dealings. I was raised to treat people the way I want to be treated (which explains why I still work for people instead of having people work for me).

/also, I refused to work with Religious Paid Programming, where all the money was in that biz
//didn't want to go to h3ll for stealing money from old people
///that's all Religious Programming is, by the way... stealing money from old people
 
2006-06-09 05:40:29 PM
For Fark's sake search engines are so 1990's. Doesn't everyone have their favorite sites bookmarked or know the URL? Besides, the Great Chinese Firewall is way overrated. It is so easy to defeat. I had a site that was banned because we were fond of posting anti-CCP threads and instructions on how to defeat the firewall. For some reason the site got the same amount of hits from mainland China as it did before being banned.

I must have missed something about Ronco-- I enjoyed my Pocket Fisherman.
 
2006-06-09 05:43:32 PM
Poeple can biatch all they want about oil co's and record profits. I just saw a major Energy Analyst say that Oil co's make 8 cents a gallon for a high risk venture and the Federal gov't makes 51 cents on that same gallon at ZERO risk.
 
zz9
2006-06-09 05:44:18 PM
I love that Google have a big warning about the removed page, that they can't link to, but direct you to a site with a copy of the lawyers letter telling them not to link to that site, with the URL of the site in it!

I guess that's Google's way of meeting the letter of law but actually highlighting the site for anyone searching for Scientology!
 
2006-06-09 05:44:19 PM
OK, after that goofy post, a more serious one...

Google does absolutely NOTHING to block Chinese users from Google.com - nothing. The Chinese goverment filters search results that it doesn't like - thereby making Google.com behave unpredictably to Chinese users.

The Chinese government is going to censor Internet pages it doesn't like, no matter what. Therefore, Google made a version that's pre-censored - giving users relatively the same results, but in a more predictable and robust manner.

Google has basically been given two options by the Chinese government - provide users with censored and buggy service, or censored and reliable service. It chose the latter (and, actually, kept the former available as an option).

People who are on the warpath against Google are acting like Google had a third option - to provide uncensored results to Chinese users. Google is a big, powerful company, but it can't single-handledly overturn one of the fundamental policies of a near-superpower government.

Should Google protest China's censorship policies? Yes. Can it, through sheer willpower - or even bribery, change them? No.

So, Google is offering the best possible service it can to Chinese users, under non-ideal situations that it can't control. Sorry, but this just doesn't feel that evil to me. It's the Chinese goverment that's illegal.

People complain that Google has become too powerful, yet at the same time they pretty much expect them to overthrow a goverment.
 
2006-06-09 05:46:05 PM
Recruits Sought for Porn Squad

Let's get all our finger wagging towards China done now cuz once the Bush administration moves forward with the war on pornography, the internet here is going to nearly as censored. Sure there's a difference between oppressing freedom and preventing us from viewing midget porn, but dammit I want my midget porn.
 
2006-06-09 05:47:40 PM
Do you seriously think the government does not restrict or monitor our use of the internet?

Restrict, no. Monitor, yes.

How do you think it's being restricted? If I don't see a followup post, I'll assume the Man got you.


You're restricted from uploading/downloading copyrighted MP3s in the US. You can go to jail for that.

You are owned by the corporate Matrix.

Public libraries restrict porn viewing. That's another lost freedom.

We have millions of laws in this country. Each law is one less freedom.
 
2006-06-09 05:49:18 PM
Nope, there isn't a difference between oppressing freedom and censoring midget porn. That's because midget porn is only the beginning. There is no end. Piety is not self limiting.
 
2006-06-09 05:49:59 PM
I don't get it.

If google didn't filter for China it'd just be banned in China and they'd all use msn search or ask or yahoo, etc. Whats google doing that's evil?
 
2006-06-09 05:50:01 PM
Freak: Let's get all our finger wagging towards China done now cuz once the Bush administration moves forward with the war on pornography, the internet here is going to nearly as censored. Sure there's a difference between oppressing freedom and preventing us from viewing midget porn, but dammit I want my midget porn.

Nice attempt, troll. Do you know what the penalty for posession of pornography in China is? How about execution and your familly is charged the cost of the execution?

Did you say midget porn?

/fap fap fap
 
2006-06-09 05:50:06 PM
Wow, another thread where eveyone EXCEPT the good ol' USA is evil. why do we consistently feel the need to impose our shiat on everyone else.

Currently, it isn't illegal for Google to do business in China, under Chinas guidelines. If you have a problem with China, then take it up with the UN. Currently, there isn't anything that China is doing that the UN is really willing to do anything about.

Under these circumstances, I think the UN has far more jurisdiction than Johnny-Fatass-American dictating what Google and China should or shouldn't be doing.

The best thing Google could do is hang in there. Eventually things will come around, and Google will already me "in".

Otherwise, China will just create their own friggin internet and their own google, and everyone will be locked out forever.
 
2006-06-09 05:50:39 PM
"Therefore, Google made a version that's pre-censored - giving users relatively the same results, but in a more predictable and robust manner."

I notice you didn't define "relatively the same results". If I lived in China and couldn't find any information on Taiwan, democracy, or human rights abuses, I'm not sure I'd use that phrase.
 
2006-06-09 05:53:34 PM
I_Hate_Iowa

Apostrophes in plurals of acronyms are a bit antiquated but not strictly incorrect. You will still find style guides recommending either way.

/Save Bob for the really bad ones
 
Displayed 50 of 95 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report