Google Ace Attorney 2: Financial Embargos For All

[BitVyper]

Jesus Christ, Google. Hey, while we're at it, what other horrible ideas can we repeat? Actually I don't even want to give any humorous examples because lord knows someone will decide it sounds like a good idea.

Quick summary: Google heard that SOPA might impact its revenue and immediately decided that the line must be drawn here. Only the line is an arrow pointing to one of the shittiest, most blatantly evil things that's been done to a website, and going "what if we just did that to anyone we didn't like?"

Edit: And before we start in on "well it's only for the BAD sites," lets keep in mind that we're talking about a group of people who feel that just having a complaint made against you is grounds to start in with petty bullying. I myself, have gotten the Youtube copyright infringement email, which literally threatens legal action if you dare to complain about it.

[Jagos]

In their defense, they were the requisite punching bag at the hearing. But yeah, throwing Wikileaks under the bus isn't really the best thing they should have done.

[rpgdemon]

Also in their defense, aren't they speaking out against the horrible idea that is the act as it stands right now?

[Jagos]

Well, a lot of Congressmen pointed out errors in this committee:

- The Net coalition was denied access to the hearing.

- There were no engineers among the witnesses (even though they sent a letter)

- The Security committee was not informed about the DNSSEC problems (Quick link to the problems)

- Mastercard was pissed about the quick turnaround problem (5 days)

What I admonish them for is how they are saying they're working on something with the RIAA and MPAA. They want to keep the Safe Harbors, and I'm fine with that. But it seemed like almost everyone was trying to convince Google to censor the internet. That was friggin insane.

[BitVyper]

Originally Posted by rpgdemon

Also in their defense, aren't they speaking out against the horrible idea that is the act as it stands right now?

They're speaking out against a horrible idea by suggesting something at least equally horrible. It's like trying to end racism by deporting everyone who isn't white. All it tells us is that Google doesn't give one fuck about censorship any further than it affects their profits.

One thing in particular that troubles me about Google's suggestion, is that there would be nothing standing in the way of embargos on non-American sites.

[shiney]

I don't get this hard-on for censorship. It doesn't make money for companies, it's not profitable. And profit is the only thing that seems to push these things. Unless it's the private for-profit prison industry that wants more inmates?

[Amake]

I think it shows some long-term, big picture thinking. If you can exert some control over what the customers get to know, you get closer to controlling what they can think and buy. Like if you can run a Coca-Cola news channel that makes itself out to be the one true bastion of undisputed journalistic integrity and also be the only news the customers get to hear, it's a safe bet you can use that to sell some soda. That's just a far away dream of course. But lobbying for censorship is the first step.

BY THE WAY "sopa" in Swedish means "piece of garbage". It's a pretty basic insult.

[01d55]

Originally Posted by shiney

I don't get this hard-on for censorship. It doesn't make money for companies, it's not profitable. And profit is the only thing that seems to push these things. Unless it's the private for-profit prison industry that wants more inmates?

RIAA & MPAA. They basically want to shut down anything that doesn't buy them off at the price they set.

[shiney]

Completely non-constructive violent comment goes here.

[Jagos]

Originally Posted by shiney

Completely non-constructive violent comment goes here.

The fact that Michael O' Leary (MPAA Witness at hearing) said that people should look to Iran and China for inspiration on how the internet isn't broken kinda seals the deal on this.