Not once does the name "Edward Snowden" appear anywhere on the web-page or open letter!
These companies are simply grand-standing to further their own ambition.
They don't care what happens to Snowden, they deny even his very existence.
These companies are simply grand-standing to further their own ambition.
They don't care what happens to Snowden, they deny even his very existence.
These companies have staked out a position, off the back of his endeavors, yet lack the courage and conviction to fully support him.
It makes me cringe to see Larry Page, Marissa Mayer et al posting weasel words on a web-site, as though they are champions of the people.
In the week that Nelson Mandela passed away, the contrast between giants and dwarves could not be clearer.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/how-nsa-mass-surveilla...
I agree that for the most part, geeks at these companies are as opposed to surveillance as people outside - probably even more so. However, usually, it's business impact that turns private opinion into official corporate policy.
I don't really mind it as long as it really works, and it's the outcome I wanted to see anyway, but I think it should be seen for what it really is. If this was really about principles, they would've done something about it years ago, not after they see their financials or relationships overseas drop because of it.
NOt that i disagree, but I do think if other companies (eg, apple, intel) signed off on this it would remove the stigma of self-dealing. If the "tech industry" was more broadly represented (and included say, Stanford & MIT) again this would be a much more powerful statement. But the reality, is that SV lives off of the governmnet in many indirect ways (nasa, defense, NSF grants, etc) and while they may be principled...well, I sure you get the idea. They're not that principled.
Apple's logo appear at the bottom of "An open letter to Washington".
These are the same companies that stand shoulder to shoulder with the same US government when it comes to putting immense pressure on foreign governments to give up their civil rights protections when it comes to privacy.
I can only guess as to their motives, but "high principle" definitely isn't one of them.
Can you cite examples?
I wouldn't say that. With news spreading about the NSA having access to your Google data, including your Gmail, people start to worry, and more importantly, they start to look towards alternatives. Google is getting a pretty bad reputation these days when it comes to user privacy, and this isn't helping their cause. This obviously affects their bottom line, and so they're looking for change.
That makes it pretty clear to me why this campaign is being orchestrated by the companies involved.
We'd known about strange telecommunication interception by governments for years[1] but Snowden's disclosures and the following saga brought it to the attention of the world by providing a theatrical backdrop for the media to start using. Now it's something that normal people know about, not just techies.
Regulating government surveillance is the issue these companies are best positioned to support. If they'd explicitly mentioned Snowden, the discussion could quickly be derailed.
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A and many more