Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by TelmoMenezes 2533 days ago
> Any claim that Google would have helped China censor Chinese citizens ignores the fact that Chinese search engines are already censored.

So what? That does not make censorship morally acceptable. This would be the same as saying that using slave labor is ok, if you do it in a country that already accepts slavery anyway, and you are treating you slaves better.

> And by surfacing better information for queries, it can also help people finding what they want for things that are not censored.

Once the state is performing censorship there is no such thing as "better information". If all information is filtered by the government, then all information is suspicious.

> but do consider how lives of hundreds of millions of people will be affected by your actions/inactions.

I have profound sympathy for the victims of authoritarian regimes, and I absolutely do not believe that the way to help them is to collaborate with the very system that oppresses them. Pretending otherwise sounds like Newspeak to me.

> I know some people prefer to stick their noses up and hold what they perceive as the moral high ground

Maybe some people are like that, but this is unimportant. The important thing is this: you have to put your own oxygen mask on before helping others. If we in the west allow our companies to collaborate with systems that hold values that are repugnant to our own, then we will become like those systems, not the other way around. There will be nowhere to hide. No thank you.

Let's not be naive: say what you want about the Chinese government, but they are not imbeciles. If they did not perceive Dragonfly as something that would help them maintain their repressive apparatus, they would not allow it.

2 comments

> I have profound sympathy for the victims of authoritarian regimes, and I absolutely do not believe that the way to help them is to collaborate with the very system that oppresses them. Pretending otherwise sounds like Newspeak to me.

I have relatives in China. Censorship is the least of their worries when the current Baidu monopoly is allowing promoted results that are sometimes flat-out evil (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Wei_Zexi).

I'm heartened by the response, though. Shares fell 14%, the government announced an investigation, and Baidu set aside $150m USD equivalent for people harmed by promoted results. Especially considering that the ad buyer was a government military hospital, that seems.. more just than I'd expect.

I guess it could be all for show, but I've seen worse behavior from Facebook here

Your problem is that you're seeing this issue as black and white, which never does good.
Hundreds of millions of people are "negatively affected" by their government and a concerned human being appealed to compassion. Realists can acknowledge that countries and companies will negotiate according to their own self-interest.

Google is right in sustaining that it's up to Chinese citizens to uphold said government to standards (whatever they will be): it's a technology company that wanted an access to the Chinese market, not a charity working for the good of foreign people. That's extremely practical, not something that's on a scale of black and white.

When employees define Dragonfly internals as disturbing I'm prone to honestly think that it wouldn't have helped in finding censored material. Smells like something management would say to justify a money-driven decision. Looking for a gray scale in choices like these is a distraction.

See no evil - Hear no evil - Speak no evil - Accept moral ambiguity

Let's respectfully disagree then. I firmly believe that this would have improved the status quo for everyone, and that a vocal minority who also firmly believe they are right prevented that.

They are kind of like Rorschach who refused to compromised in the last pages of Watchmen, even though it was the right thing to do (in my opinion).

I have no problem listening to the nuances. Please feel free to educate me, but give counter-arguments to what I wrote and spare me the clichés.