On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 08:32, Craig White wrote: > On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 08:06 -0700, Alan Dayley wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Randy Melder wrote: > > > editor beating death on google.cn > > > > > > editor beating death on google.com > > > > > > > > > do no evil... well maybe just a little evil. no one will notice. > > > > OK, I'll chime in with an analogy, imperfect though it may be... > > > > Lets suppose you run a "mission" or halfway-house for drug addicts. > > Your goal is to help them leave the streets, get clean and return to > > productive life. In such a position, you get first hand knowledge of > > crimes every day. Illegal drugs, drug deals, confessions of robberies > > etc. are common occurrences in your work. If you always report this > > kind of knowledge to the police, how effective will you be in your work > > with the addicted? If you don't report it, doesn't that make you an > > "accessory" to the crimes committed? > > > > Comparing the work of rehabilitation and help for the drug addicted to > > the services Google provides a huge stretch, I agree. Google's first > > job is also to make a profit so that is another way the above story does > > not quite fit. But, here is my point for telling it. > > > > If Google does not filter search results, they would be blocked > > completely from the Chinese network. Which is the lesser evil: > > Providing no information to the Chinese people or providing filtered > > information with a clear indication that the results are filtered? > > Which of the two allows you to have some influence and some > > participation in the improvement in the life of the Chinese people? > > Would being completely blocked from China to take a stand benefit the > > people more than providing at least some information? > > > > It appears to me that Google thought some participation the the > > spreading of information was more beneficial (ie less evil) than no > > participation at all. (And they thought it would earn them money, I'm > > sure.) > > > > These are the thoughts that go through my mind when thinking/discussing > > weather or not Google is "doing evil" with respect to their current > > filtering via google.cn. > > > --- > of course you can't ignore the fact that Vaughn already sees Google as > evil so by extension, whatever they do in China would be evil. > Contrariwise. Google is evil only to they extent that they perform censorship services for the Chinese government. I still think Google is about 90% non-evil. :-) Vaughn > Likewise, Randy apparently sees China as evil. > > Interestingly enough, there are reporters beat up in this country > too...and a lot more murders. > > Craig > > --------------------------------------------------- > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us > To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings: > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss > > --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss