Chinese browser collects your data? Spyware.
American company collects your data? $1,400,000,000,000 valuation.
This reminds me of how we call Russian billionaires "oligarchs" but we just call American billionaires...billionaires.
American company collects your data? $1,400,000,000,000 valuation.
This reminds me of how we call Russian billionaires "oligarchs" but we just call American billionaires...billionaires.
2.) People call out Google all. the. time. There's an article here weekly about dumping Google, finding alternatives, praying for antitrust regulation, etc.
3.) We don't commonly call billionaires who live in the middle east, china, and other non-western countries "oligarchs", do you know why?
Why are you so upset about Xiaomi getting called out?
We should be more consistent in our terminology.
They're referring to Alphabet's (Google) market cap, not Xiaomi's.
The GP responded to each line in the original comment with a number. So, their point about Google (point #2) was seemingly unrelated to their point about Xiaomi's market cap (point #1) as they addressed different parts of the original comment.
The GP mentioned Google perhaps not because of the market cap mentioned in point #1, but rather as a response to the original comment's mention of American companies.
This is further evidenced by their use of point #3 to refer to the term oligarch, which was the third topic raised in the original comment.
You can see how not clear this is based on other replies to the comment as well.
I'm referring to Google with that valuation.
>We don't commonly call billionaires who live in the middle east, china, and other non-western countries "oligarchs", do you know why?
Propaganda? An oligarch is a rich person with a lot of political influence. Sounds like an average billionaire to me.
>People call out Google all. the. time. There's an article here weekly about dumping Google, finding alternatives, praying for antitrust regulation, etc
I don't think I have ever seen a mainstream publication refer to Google apps and services as spyware. Which of course is what they are.
>Why are you so upset about Xiaomi getting called out?
Only annoyed at the obviously biased language.
They win elections on shutting down his headquarter plans. They want to break up his company, raise his taxes on unrealized capital gains, they want to force him to divest his personal investments like WaPo.
Same goes for other billionaires. You think there's a lot of love for Ken Griffin? Or the Google founders? Or Jamie Dimon? Of course not.
Billionaires are a common bogeyman for the populists that have ruled the capitol for the last 10 years or so.
[1] https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/amazon-city-benefits-sec...
In public, sure. Behind the scenes, they're taking meetings with his lobbyists, and somehow the tax raise never happens despite politicians talking about ad nauseam.
Part of modern politics is running a kabuki theatre of performative populism on the campaign trail. Not much happens once they are in office, because you need quick wins ahead of the next election.
also note that the Asian billionaires are learning for people like bezos/gates. In public they may be hate figures - but everyone orders from Amazon. Tax breaks for large companies.
(i.e) use thinktank to pass legislation to make everything they do legal.
Actions matter more than words. At this time, it's not even clear if Biden will go to the mat for a nationwide $15/hr minimum. That would do far more to incentivize Amazon to improve working conditions, as its $15/hr starting rates would no longer be competitive.
So the instant someone is elected they start calling Random Joe for funding their next campaign? Of course not. Politicians talk to people who help fund them, that or they are out. Having a politician's ear is power that Random Joe doesn't have. Using Bezos is disingenious. How about Musk or Bill Gates or one of the many rich oligarch families who have the same name as former presidents? Don't pretend money has less power in US politics than in Russian politics. If anything it is worse.
You seem pretty active on HN so I'm a bit skeptical that you honestly believe this. But I'll respond in good faith anyways. Here's the first result from Google (didn't even use DDG)
- (Washington Post) Goodbye, Chrome: Google’s Web browser has become spy software[0]
But since you're active I'm sure you know about The Social Dilemma, Snowden, etc. I've seen episodes on 60 Minutes, CNN, Fox, and pretty much everywhere that calls criticism to companies like Google and Facebook. Does China get called out more often? Yeah. Why? Because we're in a cold war with them. But still in many of these pieces I've seen them make slights at American tech companies. Things like saying that what they do is bad, but what China does is worse.
[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/06/21/google-...
The Russian oligarchs are a group of people that grabbed large amounts of wealth by reaping the downfall of the Soviet Union. They are a very specific, well connected group of people outside of normal Russian billionaires. The reason specifically that they are oligarchs instead of just normal billionaires is that they are very plugged into the government and sway its operation. And I know there's some cynics out there that will be like "well that's just billionaires in general" but I encourage you to learn about the leverage this group of people have on normal government operations.
With regards to the observation that no one refers to Google as spyware, I don't think I see this either. But I do see tons of mainstream articles raising the point that Google spies on users. The problem is that (it feels like, at least) only us tech-inclined seem to care:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jenniferhicks/2020/10/27/heres-...
>The report found that 80% of Americans think at least one tech giant is listening in on their conversations: Facebook at 68%; TikTok at 53%; and Google at 45%. But only 18% said they had deleted Facebook because of privacy concerns.
I fully agree Google is just an advertising company dressed up, and also further propose that its open source contributions and tech projects are its robing. I think there's still room to criticize other companies however, especially since privacy issues from companies like Xiaomi don't often get featured on HN.
I'm not suggesting the former is without fault, and fault by one does not absolve another. But you're right in that these are two very, very different things.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)
American company will collect data to show you ads and profit.
Are they really same?
One could say the motives are different, but to act as if American groups collect data purely for profit isn't true.
>Are they really the same?
No, but acting similarly doesn't imply identical similarity.
Unless you get a target on your back, in which case the American company will provide the American law enforcement agencies with whatever data they want to take action against you and your family.
Your assertion is just a variation of "if you're not doing anything wrong you shouldn't worry about spying".
Really, that is what you got from my comment.
In the case of CCP it can even be who you are, as in Tibetan, Uighur and so on.. Or, a national of a different country that China wants to spy on, or a relative of someone that China thinks has a differing opinion from CCP and so on..
It's not even on the same planet, let along in the same ballpark..
They're both evil, just that US is less so.
They really aren't the same and personally I'd rather not have my data collected, but I'd rather it be dispersed with a corporate arms race who aren't allowed to set laws than an aggregate that belongs to a party that has much more control over my life.
7 years later and it's like Snowden never even existed.
I, for one, would prefer, if I have a choice, it to be just my Gov and not a foreign Gov that I consider to be hostile..
This seems intuitive at first sight but doesn't make sense to me: is it your Gov or a foreign Gov that can more likely bother your life?
The short version is that unless you live inside the PRC data harvested on you is highly unlikely to matter no matter what you do. Inside the US or US allies? Be careful.
And your kids data. Grades, searches, web history, pics, diaries. I can totally see new private APIs for recruiters, banks, insurances - like personal assessment scores.
Don't try to whitewash it.
If anything, you face a much greater threat from the American intelligence apparatus than one in a foreign country.
But, the point I actually want to make is that this implies that people aren't concerned with Google's use of their private data, which I think is demonstrably not true, given that they've got multiple open lawsuits against them over it.
So for someone like me, living in a 14 eyes country, are you saying it is worse for my privacy that a government on the other side of the earth that my government doesn't really like might have access to some of my data is better compared to a country my government are sharing data with who also have access to pretty much everything that happens online? I know for a fact that no matter what I say or do online PRC agents will never knock down my door. US agents? That would be quite a lot easier. In less serious waters, privacy is also worse as we know from Snowden that the US not only harvest everything it can but it also share it with US businesses. Will I ever see ads based on an algorithm trained on data from both sides? No idea, but I know which one would be worse for me by a long shot.
Note: it also isn't a derogatory term, as it appears to be implied here, it just is an identifier of how wealth was accumulated.
Russian billionaires came to their wealth purely through corruption - i.e. using via their connections during the crucial years of transformation to market economy to buy huge state-owned industrial companies for 0.1-1% of their real value.
Russian Oligarchs are called that because they are about two dozen people who looted about 95% of the country's wealth and are basically a transnational crime syndicate masquerading as a govt.
I can't tell of you are deeply clueless, trolling, or spreading dezinformatziya. Either way, perhaps you should remember this quote from famous American author Mark Twain: "It is better to remain silent and let people think you are a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt".
Seriously, this is what you're going with?
Russigan oligarchs are people who just straight out stole national assets from the Soviet Union/Russia, with the help of the current ruler. There's a relatively clear definition:
The problem we have is with their externalities. For oligarchs, the main line of business <<is>> the problem.