GooglyMoogly

Google used to obey China's censorship requests, and was allowed in China. Then Google decided to stop obeying the requests, and China blocked Google.

You're saying that China was happy about that because China wanted Google out anyway and needed an excuse? If China didn't need an excuse, China could have blocked Google from the start. China has blocked things it considers offensive without an explicit action from that party (such as Winnie the Pooh).

If Google was obeying China's censorship, what would China find offensive about Google?

Does China find a similar level of offensiveness in the NBA and Blizzard, such that China is disappointed that they censored themselves and thus China doesn't have an excuse to block them?

Google is blocked in China for refusing to censor what China wants. Bing works in China.

Freedom of speech

When I google the WSJ article URL, and click the link from the search results, I don't get a paywall.

Well football player Colin Kaepernick previously faced a lot of criticism for kneeling during the national anthem to protest police brutality and racism, and Donald Trump said he should be fired. Colin then accused the NFL of keeping him out of the league due to it.

Although this is a bit different, because this happens on the field, whereas Twitter is more separate.

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21176976

My thought is that it's ok to deal with China as long as they play by our rules not their rules (such as censorship). If they see that they can still operate successfully under a system with freedom of speech, maybe they won't be so against it.

But yes, you do have to be careful not to let them become a large enough percentage of revenue that the company would be in danger if China started threatening to pull out.

Google said no to China's censorship and is doing pretty well.

I know multiple colleagues who have 1.5 hour commutes each way. For example live in San Francisco and commute to Mountain View, or live in Oakland and commute to Mountain View.

>A view is a view, and an ad will pay out the same regardless of the quality of the content on the page.

That's not really true. Advertisers can bid on how much they want to pay for each individual impression. Advertisers will likely bid more for ads on high quality websites. Advertisers will also bid more for people willing to buy stuff.

Google has only ever filed 2 patent suits. This one against Uber, and one against BT. The BT one was only after BT gave meritless patents to patent trolls under the condition that the patent trolls would immediately sue Google and Android phone manufacturers.

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-21458094

When your company stores very private info on billions of people, and is actively attacked (sometimes successfully) by the top intelligence agencies of the world[1][2], you have to be extremely careful, and monitor everything.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Aurora

[2] https://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/tech-companies-s...

At least some contractors get some of the perks. I've seen kitchen workers, security, maintenance workers eating in the cafes. This article says bus drivers have access to the cafes and gym:

http://www.businessinsider.com/google-bus-drivers-work-long-...

If all the contractors became employees the diversity numbers would improve. But the pay rate correlation to minorities would decline.

Google was at the career fair at my university. I went and talked to them. They said apply online. I did that, did phone interviews and got an internship.

So at least for Google, they don't need to come to your college.

I've heard multiple times that taking food home is "ungoogly". I can't remember exactly where, but I think at least once in one of the many training/ethics videos I had to watch.