Dump Google?

[Robert Holtzman]

On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 05:32:31PM -0600, Michael Loftis wrote:
> 
> 
> --On Saturday, September 11, 2010 3:51 PM -0700 Robert Holtzman 
> <holtzm at cox.net> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 04:17:06PM -0600, Michael Loftis wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> --On Saturday, September 11, 2010 12:06 PM -0700 Robert Holtzman
> >> <holtzm at cox.net> wrote:
> >
> >           ..........snip..........
> >
> >> >
> >> > Google's archiving all searches isn't the only reason to dump it. If
> >> > you are willing to use a search engine that censors web sites at
> >> > China's whim go right ahead. Google puts their profit ahead of their
> >> > stated support of the free flow of information. Only the lazy or those
> >> > who are uninformed or lack principals use Google....and yes, I do use
> >> > another search engine.
> >>
> >> Wow you really don't pay any attention to reality do you?
> >>
> >> Google did it's best NOT to bend to China.  But in order to maintain any
> >> "official" presence at all in China they had to make available a
> >> "Chinese  censorship approved" version of Google search.  They did their
> >> best to  legally maintain the full search view for China.
> >
> > Up until the time the PRC threatened not to renew their license. Then
> > they dropped their pants and bent over.
> 
> Actually, no they didn't.  They said screw it, and left.  The remaining .cn 
> is all in .com.hk, which has different laws.

Running a search on "google + remains + china" turned up some sites (one
dated Thursday July 1, 2010) saying they are still there but pointing
out that the link to the HK site exists. Also, an Inquirer site says

"However, while not quite toeing the red party line, Schmidt continued,
"We continue to follow their laws, we continue to offer censored results
but at a reasonable short time from now we'll be making some changes
there."

He added, "We'd like to do that on somewhat different terms than we have
but we remain quite committed to being there." 

This is dated Fri Jan 22 2010 and I'm well aware that things could have
changed drastically since then.

Like I said, I stand by my statement.

> 
> >
> >> So now there's the
> >> limited Chinese censored site, but a simple click will get you the
> >> unfiltered version still in most cases.
> >
> > That came as a surprise to me. I remember reading that the PRC made them
> > eliminate the HK link.
> 
> They can't make them do much of anything to the .com.hk hosted 
> infrastructure.

No one said that they were forced to do anything to the HK
infrastructure. My understanding was that they were forced to remove the
link. 

> 
> If they are so completely self serving then why have there been something 
> like 700 published research papers from Google (Yahoo! Research also has a 
> similar number) -- why has Google sponsored the summer of code for the last 
> six years?  Why has google open sourced so many different technologies? 
> Some of Google's papers and research are what helped to start the latest 
> evolution in computing (they call it the cloud).

You're thinking in absolutes. Just because they are self serving in one
area doesn't mean they are in all others.

             ..........snip..........

-- 
Bob Holtzman
Key ID: 8D549279
"If you think you're getting free lunch,
 check the price of the beer"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-discuss/attachments/20100911/88ffa1c8/attachment.sig>