Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Google Committed to Chinese Business 175

Posted by Zonk from the going-the-long-haul dept.
Snowgen writes "Despite this week's earlier story that hinted Google may consider pulling out of China over the topic of censorship, Reuters is now quoting Sergey Brin as saying that 'Google Inc. is committed to doing business in China despite criticism the company has faced for abiding by Chinese government censorship restrictions.'" More from the article: "Brin told a small group of invited journalists: 'I think it's perfectly reasonable to do something different. Say, OK, let's stand by the principle against censorship and we won't actually operate there ... That's an alternative path. It's not the one we've chosen to take right now'."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Committed to Chinese Business More

Google Committed to Chinese Business

Comments Filter:

  • Typo in headline (Score:5, Insightful)

    by winkydink ( 650484 ) * <sv.dude@gmail.com> on Friday June 09, 2006 @12:47PM (#15503306) Homepage Journal
    It should read "Google committed to Chinese Revenue"

    • Re:Typo in headline (Score:3, Interesting)

      by GPLDAN ( 732269 )
      Google committed to share price. As somebody who rode a measly $5k up to $30k with Google shares, I happily have now stepped off the bandwagon of shareholders. The stock is overvalued. Google spreadhseet has showed that while AJAX Web apps have many neat features, they are not ready to take the place of OpenOffice.


      What they think will gain from being in China will get offset by the corruption that will infiltrate the company. Pretty soon, the Chinese will want Google's research to start occuring over th

      • Re:Typo in headline (Score:3, Insightful)

        by quanticle ( 843097 )
        In this, China is much like WalMart. Sure, you get the access to the world's largest middle-class, but, in return, the Chinese have you on a leash. Any time you do something internally that the Chinese dislike, they can tug the leash by threatening to revoke access to their market.

        The same principle applies to WalMart. By getting access to WalMart you get access to the largest distribution system in the world. Initially, this is a huge windfall for your company. However, later on you see that you've giv

  • Principles? What're those? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Friday June 09, 2006 @12:49PM (#15503323) Homepage Journal
    Say, OK, let's stand by the principle against censorship and we won't actually operate there ... That's an alternative path. It's not the one we've chosen to take right now'.

    He then added "I mean, what good are principles anyway? They don't make you any money. Keeping your word and following your beliefs, well, it's highly overrated.

    • This is a race to the bottom. I think the ambivelence that Google displays is a reasonable response to a complicated issue. I don't think it's an unreasonable position to say you will cooperate with someone who is doing something that you dislike, because not cooperating is not going to stop them, and at least if you're the one cooperating, you know what's going on, and you can shape the process.

      • I think the ambivelence that Google displays is a reasonable response to a complicated issue.

        I'll disagree. I don't see it as complicated at all.

        Which do you value more?
        #1. Money
        #2. Your claimed morals and ethics?

        I don't think it's an unreasonable position to say you will cooperate with someone who is doing something that you dislike, because not cooperating is not going to stop them, and at least if you're the one cooperating, you know what's going on, and you can shape the process.

        That is based upon t

        • That is based upon the unstated assumption that you will have any influence in what they're planning on doing.

          Of course, that's the entire point of cooperation. The Chinese government needs something from Google. Google can play ball to varying degrees, or they can stonewall and become marginalized.

          Are you expendable? That's possible. But i'll put it to you again (and again this requires some trust in Google), is it not better to know for yourself what China is doing? Again, if there's no way for th

          • You are right regarding core morals and ethics. Once you've hit the bone, you can't cut any further. That doesn't mean that principles you are flexible on are not part of your ethical or moral structure.

            There is an old joke that illustrates how you are wrong on that.

            Guy: Would you sleep with me for a million dollars?
            Woman: Yes.
            Guy: Would you sleep with me for a dollar?
            Woman: No! What kind of woman do you think I am?
            Guy: We've already established that. Now we're negotiating price.

            The moral of that story is

    • If you were in China would you rather have a censored google or no google at all? Not living in China you could probably say no google, but I'm sure if you didn't have it, you would take the opposite opinion. You'd also probably thing it was evil of google to abandon your country. As a search company, their job is to make as much content accessibly to as many people as possible. Removing a major part of the population would be much worse than just removing some of the content.

      • As a search company, their job is to make as much content accessibly to as many people as possible. Removing a major part of the population would be much worse than just removing some of the content.

        The government removes people. Google removes content. Google is complying with the wishes of the government, thus lending them power, thus helping them remove people. The american consumer, by buying Chinese products, is helping pay Chinese taxes, thus helping the government kill people. But, the American p

      • Wow. You are really off the mark.

        If you were in China would you rather have a censored google or no google at all? Not living in China you could probably say no google, but I'm sure if you didn't have it, you would take the opposite opinion

        This stance is so tired. Google is doing no good in China. Google doesn't have the ability to change a thing in China. Good search results (subjective) do not feed starving peoples, unseat oppresive leaders, or aid in revolts and protests. Especially if these results are
    • as long as the chinese are commited to censorship i'm glad there are open source projects out there to to help protect people from that kind of ruthless censorship.

      As long as sites like the sourceforge are around, people will be able to communicate freely. Google is a busisness, they need to have project that make money, but to be honest if the chinese were so determined to end freedom of speech I'd be 100% behind google finding other ventures to make money at.

      I have spent the last 12 years of my life belie
      • As long as sites like the sourceforge are around, people will be able to communicate freely


        Might want to take a break from the bong for a few days, dude. Sites have to be accessed, so if someone else controls the access it doesn't matter how free & open the site is. There was an open relay notifier, but it's gone now, which kind of sums up the situation.

    • He then added "I mean, what good are principles anyway? They don't make you any money. Keeping your word and following your beliefs, well, it's highly overrated.

      And somewhere in Redmond, WA, someone is cackling...

  • Continuation (Score:3, Funny)

    by Kesch ( 943326 ) on Friday June 09, 2006 @12:50PM (#15503325)
    "Brin told a small group of invited journalists: 'I think it's perfectly reasonable to do something different. Say, OK, let's stand by the principle against censorship and we won't actually operate there ... That's an alternative path. It's not the one we've chosen to take right now'."

    The article goes on to say:

    Brin said these words as a group of stockholders stood behind him holding a shotgun and several cattle prods
    • Brin said these words as a group of stockholders stood behind him holding a shotgun and several cattle prods

      All while dancing, nubile imperial concubines and heavy sacks of pristine tea leaves and silk dangled seductively directly in front of the podium.
  • As the Telcos got what they wanted to get to do with internet, i suspect that almost all of us will be vying for the freedom and equal opportunity of the internet in china.

    Google should do wise to stay in china, as the thing closest to internet as we know it will only exist in china after some 6-12 months, thanks to 'Telecommunications OPPORTUNITY' act.

    What "opportunity" this is i wonder ... Opportunity to f.ck up the biggest technological&international revolutiuon in the history of the world ?

  • Yea sure (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bwd ( 936324 ) on Friday June 09, 2006 @12:51PM (#15503340) Homepage
    They are making it sound like they are taking some kind of stand in China. That is the impression I'm getting out of their comments. That is all BS. They're making the decision to not get left out of the China market even if that means compromising every principle they have. They are commited to making money in China, not free speech.
  • Oh ya, It's money talks bullsh!t walks.

  • Question for Brin (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 09, 2006 @12:53PM (#15503357)
    I have just one question for Brin: If censoring words like "democracy" to the people of the world's largest country, because you were asked to by its authoritarian government, isn't an "evil" thing for a company in the information-distribution business to do, then what exactly would qualify as "evil", if anything?

    • Re:Question for Brin (Score:3, Insightful)

      by kfg ( 145172 )
      . . .what exactly would qualify as "evil", if anything?

      Falling stock prices.

      KFG

  • Famous Last Words (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Brin: Where is my company's motto? Is she safe? Is she all right?
    China: It seems that in your anger, you killed her.
    Brin: I... I couldn't have. She was alive. I felt her. Nooooooooooooooooooooooo!

  • Why is everyone amazed? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mikesd81 ( 518581 ) <.mikesd1. .at. .verizon.net.> on Friday June 09, 2006 @12:58PM (#15503401) Homepage
    Google is above all a business. A business is to make money. They stood for American rights when the gov't wanted documents. It seems everyone is forgetting this when the Google China stories creep up. Consider: If you own a business and you open an office in China and you want to make money....will you defy the Chinese gov't? Or will you conform to their laws and policies?
    • So in other words, you're saying they won't compromise their beliefs when there is very little threat of losing money, but they will compromise their beliefs if the chances to lose out on revenue is very high.

      The problem with this is that this isn't a "good" principle to live by, it is in fact evil and unethical, but since it seems to be the norm in this day and age, it's understandable to see why some would deem this practice as "ok".
      • I'm saying that business is business. They don't just have the belief of "do no evil". They also have the belief to profit. Plus, if they go against China, then how is that "do no evil" if their breaking China's law? I don't agree with China's laws, or all the laws of America for that matter, but until the laws are changed, if you want to do business in those countries then follow the law. It's no different than stores requiring shoes and a shirt. So, would you be upset if they didn't serve you becaus
    • Google seems to be playing both sides of the fence here. I wouldn't be surprised if the US Government via Google started inserting crapaganda into China. It would be a plus for Google to get a foot in the door and get Chinese revenue since the market is huge, it would also be a plus for the US government to get in via Google (as the US always seems to do - getting a foot in the door), to unload crapaganda contrary to Chinese laws. Wouldn't be the first time. What you see here (Google in China) is nothing mo
    • Oh, trust me. Don't open this can of worms [slashdot.org]. ;)
  • Previous poster mentioned to me that "Don't be evil" and "Making the world a better place" are on their IPO prospectus. One can argue they are currently doing the opposite, hence cheating on share-holders. If fundamental principles are compromised, the end cannot justify the means.

  • Don't hate (Score:3, Insightful)

    by inexia ( 977449 ) on Friday June 09, 2006 @01:02PM (#15503426)
    The first rule of Google - China is that you do not talk about Google - China
  • I don't think Brin has the foresight to think this, but I say, go for it. All the communication and business is going to destroy Chinese control and censorship in a few years anyway. PRofit-driven though they are, they're inadvertantly likely going to destroy censorship. On the other hand, they could be establishing a trend of censorship and further engraining it. But I doubt it.

  • In other news... (Score:2, Funny)

    by w33t ( 978574 )
    The Chinese are upset that Google continues to do business with the democratic west.

  • Plain and Simple (Score:3, Insightful)

    by WED Fan ( 911325 ) <akahige@NOspAm.trashmail.net> on Friday June 09, 2006 @01:05PM (#15503458) Homepage Journal
    Google is now evil. Censorship, providing access to the secret police so they can find the dissidents, and etc. is as much as breaking their vow of "Don't be evil" as a doctor taking the vow, "First, do no harm," and then providing genocidal services. It is as bad as Dow Chemical providing the means of extermination. But, Google goes in with eyes WIDE OPEN and experience knowing this is what they are doing.

  • Everyone Shames Google... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ZSpade ( 812879 ) on Friday June 09, 2006 @01:10PM (#15503498) Homepage
    But they forget who the real scourge is here. Google is no influence over policy in China, nor could it provide any uncensored searches without risking the lives of those who live there. The Chinese government is to blame here, and no matter how much we badmouth google for abiding by that countries LAWS, it will not change things. Today the people of China are opressed, Tomorrow they will be opressed, and nothing is going to change that. Google would only be depriving the Chinese of a tool by pulling out, not their rights to an uncensored world... no you can thank China for that.
    • What absolutely amazes me is that in EVERY SINGLE Google China discussion, no one says a dicky bird about MSN China, or Yahoo China, or all these other fucking search engines that have Chinese sites. Why is Google being singled out? because of their "do no evil" policy? Sorry, but I'd consider it more evil to deprive China of Google, even if it is censored.

      Which would you prefer, a censored Wikipedia or no Wikipedia? I'd take censored. Something is better than nothing.
      • >Sorry, but I'd consider it more evil to deprive China of Google, even if it is censored.

        Why do you say this?

        Google is a company; is it wrong to deprive a group a people access to the services of a company?

        Do you also think it is wrong if China kicked out Pfizer? Or Universal Studios? Or a noodle-making Japanese company?

        Why do the people of China NEED the services of Google?
    • Google would only be depriving the Chinese of a tool by pulling out

      Heh heh heh.
    • When you set a standard for yourself, you should not be supprised that people want to hold you to that standard. Google declared their motto was "Don't be evil." They were clearly going after people dislike for corperations like Microsoft that are willing to step on consumers a bit if it helps them make more money.

      It's been a successful campaign too. Slashdotters have bought in to it, as has the media at large, making Google out to be a good, idealistic company that's more concerned with doing right than ma

  • It is not Googles responsibility to change China (Score:3, Insightful)

    by bunions ( 970377 ) on Friday June 09, 2006 @01:10PM (#15503499)
    And I think it's preposterous to ask them to hew to some sort of Holier-Than-Thou philosophy while the rest of the world rushes to do business with China.
    • No.
      Any business that directly portrays themselves as the company that can make money without doing evil [google.com] should be expected to do just that.
      They have insinuated, in their own right, a 'holier-than-thou' attitude themselves, now their ignorance of doing the right thing in China is contradicting and insulting.
      • (a) honestly, can you find nothing more important to do with your life than rooting out tiny fragments of hypocrisy in others?

        (b) there's easy cases to be made that some google is better than none, and I've seen many of those cases made by actual people in China, not self-righteous internet nerds.

        (c) Google cannot be the Only Moral Company. Expecting them to be so is tantamount to expecting them to commit corporate suicide over a matter they are incapable of changing.

        In short, grow up and learn to see the

        • (a) honestly, i can't.. we dont live in a free country because people like you chose to keep their mouths shut and take it in the...
          (b) well.. lets hear some cases then! you're obviously the expert, or maybe you just play one on t.v.
          (c) incapable of chaning? well for starters they could follow their original 'mantra' and not deal with communist censorship.. or they could just pull out now. they choose neither.

          maybe you don't understand the real dangers of communists and their socio-political censorship
          • (a) and we don't live in a free country because people like you have plenty of spare time for fault-finding either.

            (b) read the rest of the thread, there's several. The big one is 'which does more good: no google in china or some google in china? Is it better to refuse to be part of a corrupt system and try to act for change, or to simply refuse to acknowledge that the system exists?'

            (c) if you honestly think that Google refusing to work with the Chinese will have any impact at all, you're either wildl

    • I think it's preposterous to ask them to hew to some sort of Holier-Than-Thou philosophy while the rest of the world rushes to do business with China.

      Well, if their corporate mottos wasn't some "Holier-Than-Thou" crap I'd follow you on this.

      As for the rest, sure it's important to "clean your own backyard" before being a critic of your neighbor but if everyone had the "the rest of the world is doing it" attitude nothing would change. People need to do what is right in their own eyes but you can't dismiss
      • the point is, as 'bsyatplay' pointed out, that without a broad consensus, a google boycott of China is completely ineffective and serves no purpose other than to pacify idealistic bystanders.
        • The point is, as I pointed out, that it has to start somewhere. Not everyone is going to go over at once. Christ, why is this such a hard concept?
          • Yeah, it has to start somewhere. And that somewhere is some form of agreement across a broad base of governmental organizations and private corporations that they won't do business with China. Otherwise Google is just tilting at windmills.
            • Otherwise Google is just tilting at windmills.

              Yeah, that's the way to think of it... I love defeatists. Google comes out gang busters with all this idealogy about the freedom of information but HELPING China censor their population is "just tilting at windmills"? Please.
              • Sorry, but I view the idea that google unilaterally declining to do business with the Chinese will have any effect on anything other than googles balance sheets as hopelessly naive. China doesn't care. Well, I take that back: MS and Yahoo would be overjoyed. If you'd like to put forth some kind of reasonable scenario to the contrary, I'm all ears. I'll just mention preemptively that "if google throws away billions in potential revenue, maybe other corporations will as well" doesn't really fall under the
                • On the other hand, I view the idea that google could attempt lobby for change from inside as a reasonably pragmatic view, even if unlikely to produce large changes.

                  What are the chances that the company that is HELPING China censor their peasants from the internet is going to do that? Call me naive but there is something that goes deeper than profit. If you don't feel that that's true and worth working towards I'm afraid we have little to discuss.
                  • Oh, I see. You think that because Google is forced to obey Chinese law in order to do business there that they agree with it. As it turns out, that may actually not be the case, much as they may not have enjoyed turning over a bunch of search results to the US Justice Dept. In a similar vein, I don't agree with the laws regarding gun control, yet I obey them nonetheless. I'm sure you can name a few laws you find immoral but obey anyway as well.
                    • Sure, the analogy isn't perfect. I was just pointing out that simply because Google chooses to do business in China does not imply that they enjoy being party to censorship, which is what eastcoasts last post implied.
                    • IMHO their CHOICE to do business with the Chinese says loud and clear their ill-regard for the subjects of China. The choice was theirs and it was made.
                    • I guess I'm still not clear on how Google not doing business in China helps whoever the Chinese equivalent of John Q. Public is. In my eyes, there are two realistic scenarios: one scenario is Google stays away and in their place we have MSN and Yahoo. I don't really see any difference there. The other scenario is Google goes and, hopefully, actively tries to change things. I don't see a lot of difference there, but I seee some.

                      Again, I'd love to hear any realistic scenarios where Google staying away he

                    • I'd love to see how their contributing to China's agenda is going to help anyone. You're the one not seeing clearly.
                    • I'd love to see how their contributing to China's agenda is going to help anyone.

                      Say you're a Chinese programmer living in Shanghai, and your task for the day is to figure out how to write an anonymous closure in Javascript. Is being able to access google.com helpful or no?

                    • supporting the chinese and their government in this case is not helpful. no. get it through your head; in no way do i find helping a government that kills their people for "crimes" like speaking out against the government as justifiable. i don't care if yahoo or msn does it, that doesn't make it right. now, unless you can stop your one trick pony show don't bother me with the whole "but someone's going to make money". someone is going to kill an old lady tonight and steal the 10 dollars of bingo money from
                    • everything in life involves tradeoffs. I obviously don't agree with China's censorship policy, but I am capable of viewing the world in more than a simplistic black-and-white, right-and-wrong view. There are degrees of good and degrees of evil, and I obviously view Googles presence in China as a net gain.
                    • I am capable of viewing the world in more than a simplistic black-and-white, right-and-wrong view.

                      I am glad that murdering citizens over voicing disagreement with their government is such a complex issue for you. Sadly, to my so simple brain it sounds like an unjustified move by the cowardly. Let's just hope someday we will not have to live up to these high standards here too.

    • And I think it's preposterous to ask them to hew to some sort of Holier-Than-Thou philosophy while the rest of the world rushes to do business with China.

      Only if they didn't state that they were going to hold themselves to a "holier-than-thou" philosophy, rather than waiting for someone else to ask them to... It would have been different if they never said "Don't be Evil", and happily did the greed thing like many other profit-chasing businesses, unencumbered by high morals. But, they said it, they made t

  • Google was a kind of hero. Then they started coming out with a bunch of crap I didn't want to see on computers like MSIE toobars and such. As a Linux user, I tried to ignore it. The stuff exists for Linux too but it's quite possible to ignore it as nothing I install comes with a google add-on leaving me with 100% control over what I install and what I don't.

    Then Google's grey area in its dealings with China... then their foreshadowing of some sort of 'decision' on the matter, and now a statement stating
  • A few points.

    First, as has been rightly pointed out in previous debates on this subject, Google is a publicly-traded American corporation. This means it is under a legal obligation to make business decisions that maximize the value of the stock to its shareholders. Pulling out of the world's largest market, even on a matter of principle, is a poor business judgment decision that would likely result in Google getting sued by the stockholders down the line. If there is "evil" here, U.S. corporate law is as much to blame as anyone.

    Second, the Chinese government does not care about the First Amendment. Laudable though it might seem to take a stand and protest Chinese censorship by refusing their business, the Chinese brass would likely respond with the Mandarin equivalent of "Don't let the door hit you on the way out!" The censorship would continue as before, with only Yahoo and MS raking in huge profits for Chinese search traffic (Yahoo having been notably more cooperative with the People's Republic in quashing dissenting voices than Google ever was).

    If Google is really concerned about the democratic privileges of the Chinese people (which incidentally, they don't enjoy--however much Americans may find censorship to be reprehensible, China is a different country, and free speech hasn't been established there), sticking around is one of the best things they could do. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Google has always been available in China--as Google.com. Google.cn just makes it more language- and user-friendly for the Chinese consumer. Additionally, every time the Chinese engine returns censored results, isn't there a note to the effect that the document has been redacted? This would seem, in my mind, to contribute to a heightened public awareness in China as to just how pervasive the censorship regime is. This will in turn spawn more, not less, dissent, tending more towards democratic reform in the long term.

    What do the people of China really gain if Google shuts down? Even redacted information, if freely available, is far better than none if we want to motivate reform. If Google pulled out, it would lose business, subject itself to legal liability, and change nothing in China in the long term. By staying, it allows the Chinese one more tool (however controlled) for obtaining and disseminating information. No barrier is as porous as one that tries to limit the flow of information; the Great Firewall can't last forever. Maybe Google can help pull it down--but not if they leave.
    • Correct me if I'm wrong, but Google has always been available in China--as Google.com. Google.cn just makes it more language- and user-friendly for the Chinese consumer.

      You are correct. Although the creation of google.cn was not only for language barrier breaking purposes. Thanks to the great firewall of China, google.com was often incredebly slow or inaccesible most of the time. Plus it was still censored, but in ways google couldn't control or even determine.

    • First, as has been rightly pointed out in previous debates on this subject, Google is a publicly-traded American corporation. This means it is under a legal obligation to make business decisions that maximize the value of the stock to its shareholders.

      No. Google is obligated by law to behave in a manner dictated to it by its voting shareholders. While this most often is "make money" it doesn't have to be so. Since Sergey and Larry own 66.2% of the voting stock, they can do whatever they feel like, without b

    • > Google is a publicly-traded American corporation. This means it is under a legal obligation to make business decisions that maximize the value of the stock to its shareholders.

      Not so. It is obliged to act in the interest of its shareholders, but 1) the law leave a lot of wiggle room when interpreting the common interest of the shareholders and 2) I'm sure there are shareholders that think 'do no evil' is a standard that should be upheld.

      > with only Yahoo and MS raking in huge profits for Chinese sea

    • Re:Yes they're staying--and a good thing, too. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ericspinder ( 146776 ) on Friday June 09, 2006 @02:14PM (#15504089) Journal
      First, as has been rightly pointed out in previous debates on this subject[Google is]...under a legal obligation to make business decisions that maximize the value of the stock to its shareholders.
      As others have pointed out, they are under the stockholder wishes. Few public companies have a block which controls more than %50 of the votes, but the Google founders still do.

      I believe that they are right to deal with China. However, I am also happy that they are getting some hell for it, as the debate is valuable.

    • Re:Yes they're staying--and a good thing, too. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Ford Prefect ( 8777 ) on Friday June 09, 2006 @02:33PM (#15504224) Homepage
      Additionally, every time the Chinese engine returns censored results, isn't there a note to the effect that the document has been redacted? This would seem, in my mind, to contribute to a heightened public awareness in China as to just how pervasive the censorship regime is. This will in turn spawn more, not less, dissent, tending more towards democratic reform in the long term.

      And on the other side, Google seems to be doing a very good job in getting people outside China to talk about Chinese censorship and the like. Whether you agree or disagree with Google's actions, they're definitely raising awareness of who they're dealing with.

  • Odds are You are worse then google. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 09, 2006 @01:33PM (#15503701)
    so many god damn hypocrites here. ohh google is making money in china! burn them! while i type this out on my made in china keyboard, attached to my made in china computer, wearing my made in china whatever the hell while listening to shit spewing from my made in china stero, paid for by supporting made in china equipment.

    You think you're so noble trying to flame google over this. while you whisle dixie chicks songs and shop in wallmart.

    "I really hoped they would be a good company"... so that somehow I could justify my missdeeds by saying hey I bought stock in google.

    Just what the hell have you done to help the general populance of china today?

    Anything? Ever? no? then shut the hell up.

  • I love how we all see censorship as bad, and because Google is taking part in censorship we blame Google. We make no effort to blame the CHINESE GOVERNMENT for requiring that kind of censorship. Google does not exist to fight political battles over freedoms of people in China (although they do have a history of expanding into surprising new markets, I somehow feel that political picketing is not the next one).

    Summary: HELLO, Google is not the one censoring the chinese people, CHINA is the one censoring them
  • They seriously wrestled over this issue... On a big pile of money... with the cute girls the Chinese government sent over.

    Who can blame them for this decision? sheesh

    Or as a friend said "They're still abiding by the core company philosophy if by 'good' you mean a huge pile of money.. and 'evil' being a smaller pile of money. They are doing no evil"

    The ability to simply redefine for yourself what words mean to make youself into an angel, Bill Clinton would be proud :)
  • When your alternatives are to let the Chinese filter Google for you (making your search engine slow and unusable, and hiding that results are filtered) or filter it yourself (so people actually use your search engine, and tell people you are censoring data), what would you do? If Google walks away from China, the Chinese don't benefit- all that means that they need to use Bandu or Yahoo! search engines (which aren't open about the censorship like Google is, and help the government track and jail people).

  • ...people passing judgement about every action Google makes. Obeying laws of the countries you are doing business in can certainly be defended as an honorable way to live the mantra "Do No Evil".

    It is not the responsibility of Google to be a vehicle for political influence.

    I think what Google is trying to accomplish with this theme is to state that they want to compete fairly (albeit, agressively and relentlessly) in any markets they choose to compete in. And, that they want to offer a product to custom

  • Other slogans I could have suggested for companies at one time or other:

    "The network is the computer, or possibly thats the PC" - SUN
    "Invent or Copy" -HP
    "Innovating for a Safer World, Fly Concorde" - BAE
    "Good Food. Good Life. Kill Babies." - Nestle

    "Beyond Petroleum" - BP
    (unmodified, i just want to see it again because it's so hilarious)

  • Yahoo is less evil than Google (Score:3, Funny)

    by PietjeJantje ( 917584 ) on Friday June 09, 2006 @02:43PM (#15504298)
    They are equally "evil", except that Google claims in their company motto they are not, which adds to the evilness. It is like MS having as a compay motto: "Open source - Lovin' it".
  • Brin likes his hookers and that other dude his midgets.
  • Why could Google claim it would do no evil? Because it knew it would be powerful and thus could afford to do it that way.

    In other words, because it has all not money, it can talk about ethics. So why would it be surprising when Google decides to keep the business in China?

    A company does not succeed because it's good. A company succeeds because it makes money.

    Face it human. A company is a company. All of them make money.

    If one day Google pulls out of China, the reason would still be money.

    Just live with that

Slashdot Top Deals

BLISS is ignorance.

Close