Apologies for the top posting, but I consider the whole information
relevant, while not exactly replying anything point in particular...
I think people are being really hard with Google, while letting some
other search engine get away with murder (and I hope that's not
I agree that Google could have done better, or that an alliance would
be a good idea. However, I don't see this as a viable option for 2
- Google is not the first one to get into the chinese market
- It's competitor will be only too happy to see Google not getting
involved at all
In those circumstances, the power of Google to organise anything
remotely similar to a group strategy seems to me very low.
Regards (and apologies again for top posting! O:)
jordi.jane at gmail.com
On 2/14/06, Colm MacCarthaigh <colm at stdlib.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 04:58:36PM +0000, Colm Buckley wrote:
> > Not a flame, merely wish to point out that Google isn't removing
> > anything from the search results on google.cn which wouldn't be
> > blocked anyway by the Chinese government firewall.
>> That's not a very good argument at all. It's like saying it's o.k. to
> kick someone because had they gotten past you they'd only get a worse
>> It is *always* wrong to impinge on someone's civil and human rights, and
> Google simply have to accept responsibility for their part in this.
> It's their business decision to make, and there's no point being
> hypocritical about it. Saying that it would have happened anyway, that
> it would be worse otherwise is not in any way a justification for these
> kind of actions.
>> If it were, any sort of action would be justifiable, because there are
> always nefarious evil people in the world willing to be more evil than
> you are. People and companies are responsible for their own actions
> regardless, and it's not at all unfair to expect them to stand up for
> rights which should be important.
>> On the face of it, Google puts profit before freedom of speech and
> access to knowledge. They're not alone in that, and it's probably
> commercially acceptable. But please don't have the gall to try and
> pretend that the impact of this choice is somehow lessened by the worse
> actions of others.
>> > In, short, I believe that Google.cn is a net benefit for Chinese
> > internet users, and I've yet to see any convincing proposal for
> > alternative action by Google which would have been better for the
> > Chinese people.
>> Trying to get together with the other search providers, and encouraging
> a mass boycott of the Chinese terms would have been better. Also, simply
> staying out of the market entirely would have been better for the
> Chinese people in the long term (though not Google).
>> Google's mission statement starts "Google's mission is to organize the
> world's information and make it universally accessible and useful." It's
> a real shame they don't really practise it.
> Colm MacCárthaigh Public Key: colm+pgp at stdlib.net> --
> Irish Linux Users' Group mailing list
> Email: ilug at linux.ie> Options (including unsubscribe) here: http://mail.linux.ie/mailman/listinfo/ilug>>
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!