Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2007:February:15 Thursday <Wednesday, Friday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2007/2/15-18 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:45743 Activity:nil
2/15    Palestinian PM resigns:
2007/2/15-23 [Computer/Companies/Google] UID:45744 Activity:kinda low
2/15    Do no evil.  (unless it makes you big bucks).  Google censors
        Chinese ASAT image.  BTW, I couldn't find this image on the
        American google which is pretty scary if it truly isn't there
        and not just my lack of search fu.
        \_ The hypocrisy of Google, combined with the fact that Google
           searches seem to be increasingly wasting my time leads me to ask
           the question: what are you guys using instead? looks
           decent, but that's only after a few minor searches.
           \_ google search is great for me.  if one of those link farm
              sites keeps bugging me, i can add it to the Filter list
              in the CustomizeGoogle firefox extension.
              \_ That isn't google, that's some one else fixing google for you.
           \_ I am sorry, but I am confused what you mean by "hypocrisy."
              Do you mean that obeying the laws of the countries that they
              do business with is hypocritical? No where in Google's mission
              statement do I see "be anarchists" or "go to jail," is there
              something I am missing?
              \_ Hmmm, blind obedience to laws, eh?
              \_ All I'm saying is: I don't agree with their business
                 model, so I'll use something else.  That is my economic
                 right as an American.
        \_ The article is crap, your description is misleading, and your
           false pretensions are beneath you.  It has a bunch of dated and
           vague quotes about Google's censorship policy in China, and it
           does not actually cite any sources about this specific image.
           For the record, I have mixed feelings about Google and China.
           On the one hand, I find its decision to self-censor distasteful
           On the one hand, I find its decision to self-censor gay
           and question its motivation, but, on the other, I am coming
           around to the opinion that any significant increase in the flow
           of information in China moves things forward and even a heavily
           censored Google accomplishes that. -dans
           \_ Yeah, 9 days dated:
              \_ Um, no.  Quoting from the article:
                 "Last year, Google's senior policy counsel, Andrew
                  McLaughlin, defended the censorship saying the company
                  sought to balance commitments ''to satisfy the
                  interests of users, expand access to information, and
                  respond to local conditions."
                 If Google sends out the same written statement to all news
                 agencies that inquire about its stance on China and
                 censorship, it doesn't magically become "new" because one of
                 the agencies chooses to republish it.  Even if this is a new
                 statement from Google, which I highly doubt, my point that
                 the article contains no specifics about the image in question
                 stands.  Can you read?  Do you have thumbs?  Show me your
                 thumbs!!! -dans
                 thumbs!!!  Touch me! -dans
                 \_ First of all: breathe.  Second of all: it doesn't
                    magically become "new" policy.  But it's clear that it's
                    still their *current* policy.  I didn't post the first
                    link, I'm just interested in Google's policies and how
                    they line up with trying to create a world I want to
                    live in.  And I *do* agree with you that providing even
                    limited and censored information to China may be better
                    for them and us in the long term.  But, I'm still a
                    little skeptical.
                    \_ I share your skepticism, and I think it's important to
                       keep pressure on companies to change their behavior
                       when they are misbehaving.  That said, "Google's policy
                       on censorship in China unchanged since last year,
                       skeptics question Google's evilness." is not news.
                       "Google censors image (or document) foo because x, y,
                       and z" is news.  I take issue with the article because
                       it represents itself as the latter, but reads like the
                       former.  You can argue that greed is behind Google's
                       behavior with respect to China, and this is evidence
                       that the company is acting in an evil fashion.
                       Nonetheless, the question of Google's alignment is
                       still open.  There is no question that sloppy,
                       sensationalist, overly subjective, in a nutshell,
                       yellow journalism is evil. -dans
                       \_ You're both/all missing the point.  I posted the
                          original link, btw.  My point wasn't really that
                          google is hypocritical (we know they are), it is
                          that I couldn't find the image on the *American*
                  If it isn't there because google
                          censored it, then the Chinese are censoring info
                          outside their country and in *my* country.  I find
                          that very scary.  Hypothetical: how long until they
                          tell google to pull tienamen square tank squish
                          pictures off the American site?
                          \_ No, you're missing the point.  You're reasoning
                             in the wrong direction.  You believe Google is
                             hypocritical, greedy, and evil, and you're
                             presenting evidence to support this conclusion.
                             The lesser issue is that your evidence is weak
                             and circumstantial.  The bigger issue is that
                             you're picking and choosing from the complete set
                             of facts.  You present only the facts that
                             support your conclusion, and omit the
                             considerable evidence to the contrary.  Lies of
                             omission are still lies.  Now, I could conclude
                             that you're biased and have a chip on your
                             shoulder about Google, but to do so would be to
                             repeat your error.  Maybe you're just lazy.
                             Maybe there's another explanation I haven't
                             thought of.  Just because you can't find the
                             image in Google doesn't mean it's not there.
                             Even if it's absent from Google, that doesn't
                             mean China censored it.  For example, Google has
                             a fairly straightforward and public process for
                             requesting i tems be removed from its index:
                             \_ Google is a corporation: by default their
                                actions are evil and they are guilty until
                                proven innocent.  Find me the image on the
                                American google.  It should be there by now
                                somewhere in some form since that particular
                                image has been linked and cross linked a
                                bunch of places.
                                \_ Okay, this is just so blatantly idiotic it
                                   has to be a troll.  Please, if you're going
                                   to troll, at least have some fucking
                                   artifice. -dans
                                   \_ "I have a different world view so you
                                       must be an idiot and a troll".  Ok.
                                       Thanks for participating.  You could
                                       have just ignored it if it was such
                                       a blatantly idiotic troll.  HYBT?
                                       \_ All corporate acts are evil unless
                                          proven otherwise is not a worldview,
                                          it's a soundbite.  I think you're an
                                          idiot and a troll because you can't
                                          distinguish between the two, not
                                          because your views differ from my
                                          own.  Perhaps, in your head, your
                                          views are more subtle and nuanced,
                                          but you express them poorly, and
                                          this lends credence to my assertion
                                          that you're an idiot or a troll
                                          without artifice.  Besides,
                                          responding to trolls is fun,
                                          especially ones as easily baited as
                                          yourself! -dans
                                          \_ I think it's funny that you can
                                             simultaneously claim to have been
                                             trolled, getting irate and
                                             insulting about it and then decide
                                             at the end that you're really the
                                             one doing the baiting.  The
                                             reality is no one is baiting
                                             anyone.  We simply have different
                                             world views, you refuse to accept
                                             that anyone with a different view
                                             could have a valid view and it
                                             upsets you (apparently).
                                             \_ Apparently. -dans
2007/2/15-20 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:45745 Activity:moderate
2/15    is this true? heard someone say one of Al Gore's fear of Global
        warming releasing alien lifeforms that are trapped in the glacial
        ice in the Arctic.
        \_ I really hope everyone here is being sarcastic, including op.
           "Alien" here means "species new to, or not expected in the
           ecosystem".  Please tell me you're not all idiots.
        \_ dude 'THE THING' is one of the scariest movies ever.
        \_ Yes.  Yes it is.
           \- well then he can claim he discovered extraterrestrial life
              \_ No, he invented extraterrestrial life.
        \_ Except the ice in the arctic is growing colder and the ice pack
           getting thicker.  It's The Other Ones you have to worry about.
           \_ No, it is shrinking, at least according to many scientific
              sources. Here is one:
              Is there new information I am unaware of?
              \_ I think pp is confused. It's the Antarctic ice pack that's
                 getting thicker.  And it's that ice and Greenland's that pose
                 the biggest problems as far as sea levels go if they melt.
        \_ Completely false. Everyone knows that the Aliens prefer
           Antarctica over the Artic.
           \_ I know, seriously.  It's all right there in the X-Files
              movie and Stargate SG-1.  Duh!
        \_ Is it true the Republicans still say "Would you like "Freedom Fries"
           with that, Sir?" when you order a Big Mac from them?
           \_ Have you stopped beating your wife?
2007/2/15-16 [Uncategorized] UID:45746 Activity:high
2/15    My roommate has massive 38DDD tits.  Her bras are ENORMOUS.
        I could carry groceries in them.  But the rest of her
        is not fat!  What do I do?  - furious
        \_ Troll the motd
        \_ masturbate furiously
           \_ I did.  They're still huge.
                \_ Fuck I think they're even bigger than I thought.
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2007:February:15 Thursday <Wednesday, Friday>