Google threatens to cut ties with Chamber of Commerce over Protect-IP lobbying
politico.com
politico.com
>mcritz: I think the chamber of commerce could care less.
I think both of you meant they could "not" care less.
But this argument has already been had before in a million places, including on HN: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=853100. Specifically, see my comment about why it’s hard to say that could care less is incorrect: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=854042.
In hindsight though, I am saddened at how much more often conversations like that used to occur on HN, and how rarely they seem to now.
My original comment was not prescriptive. I do not claim to be the ultimate authority of the language because no such authority exists. It's hard for people to imagine, but what constitutes proper English is actually probabilistic. Some stuff is 75% good English and some stuff is 50% good English. Some idioms are more or less good English. I find the constructions under discussion to be less good, and my opinion carries the authority of my fraction of say-so as a member of the English using community.
But, frankly, I'm off track. My original point was to call attention to the inappropriate tone of one of the disputants, not participate in more natural language pedantry on the Internet.
Edited to add: The original, British form, was "I couldn't care less".
I don't think the issue is whether language prudes are offended, but whether the communication is clear.
The chamber could care less about innovative businesses. Such businesses are part of their constituency.
They take a shit on consumers. Real people are a group for whom they could not care less.
I was aware of the phrasing and using it to make my point.
Sincerely, Michael
Perhaps there is room for another national level Chamber of Commerce for the US - one with a more progressive outlook, with a look towards building new businesses and industries, not protecting dying ones.
I wonder if the dues from Google, Yahoo, the CEA, and Apple (all mentioned in the article for having or thinking about dropping out over politics), would be enough to bootstrap such an organization…...
It would be very nice to see a coalition of companies who stood together on the principle of protecting the profits that come from creating more opportunities instead of the rent that comes from a variety of state-supported monopolies (Patents, "intellectual property" (Hollywood, patent trolls), monopoly on the use of telephone poles(AT&T).
None of those companies would be particularly interested in such an organization, as they are all monolithic "old" organizations in their own right. Apple, Yahoo, and Google don't want to push through legislation that would make it easier to compete with them. Apple, certainly, is uninterested in patent reform and Google's criticisms of patent law in the US are likely to subside as they build a big enough portfolio to successfully defend themselves from the Apples and Microsofts of the world.
Google should have quit a long time ago when the CoC was revealed as nothing more than a corporate-welfare front group.
Tricky territory. It's a fight between content providers versus Google.
I have heard the Chamber of Commerce's position referred to as "Rotarian Socialism - Free Enterprise, and Keep those subsidies coming." In this particular case they want to expand some members legal privileges which is even worse, long-term, than financial subsidies.