Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by saraid216 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

saraid216·

I don't, really. My point is that Google has shown that they're willing to act.

Here's the article that was submitted to HN about a recent thing:

http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=12330&MediaType=1&Ca...

Here's the HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4213162

View on HN

I understand what you mean, but these two conflicts are nowhere near the same scale. Social rights issues have a lot of work done by lots of dedicated people over decades, until they reach a tipping point. A for-profit corporation, no matter how good at marketing, will not stake their financial health by going against massive consensus, they just don't have the political/financial freedom to do that. If they had to pick between India and Pakistan in an actual war, they would take sides according to their interest or get out of both, but that's about it.

Mainly though, the scale here is way off. Apologies for the sarcastic reply before.

No, I agree. In no way did I mean to suggest that Google was going to take the role of a UN with teeth, to mediate between different countries.

It would be more accurate for me to say that Google has a demonstrated willingness to allow their employees to contribute to political activism using company resources. Absolutely, it has a selfish motive, but it's a central principle of capitalism to leverage selfish motives into public goods. (No comment on the principle itself.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com