Posted on 09/16/2010 8:54:43 AM PDT by george76
Sorry, Google, but according to the lawsuit Skyhook filed against you today, you've crossed the line. Your "don't be evil" mantra is now officially a joke.
All's fair in business, we suppose. But Google is now basically acting like heyday-era Microsoft here, throwing its weight around and screwing over small companies for its own gain. Google Android boss Andy Rubin went as far as to call Motorola co-CEO Sanjay Jha "multiple times" to impose a "stop ship" order on the company's phones, according to Skyhook's complaint.
Also, most companies don't have mantras like "don't be evil." And now, neither can Google -- not with a straight face, at least.
This move sounds especially evil because Android is supposed to be an "open" mobile platform for handset makers, with an open ecosystem -- one that theoretically lets handset makers and application developers control their own destinies. But it turns out "open" is only "open" in Google's world if it furthers Google's aims.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
I personally use Bing or Yahoo now, and I’ll NEVER be in the market for a smartphone.
A phone is meant to make and receive voice telephone calls. This business with text messaging and browsing the web from a handheld with a 3.5 inch screen is ridiculous!
Full disclosure: I’m a 30 year old man, the primary market for these devices.
http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/scraper.htm
Skyhook is just pissed because Google offers the same technology for free. They realize the end is near.
1) “Candidates at Google: Barack Obama”
Thursday, November 15, 2007 at 11:43 AM ET
Posted by Andrew McLaughlin, Director of Public Policy and Government Affairs
http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2007/11/candidates-at-google-barack-obama.html
2) Tuesday, October 21, 2008
“Google CEO Eric Schmidt backs Obama; will hit campaign trail with him....”
By MONICA LANGLEY and JESSICA E. VASCELLARO
(NB)(From the WSJ)
http://thecokerreport.blogspot.com/2008/10/google-ceo-eric-schmidt-backs-obama.html
3) May 29, 2009
“Googles Top Policy Executive to Join Obama Administration”
By MIGUEL HELFT
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/googles-top-policy-exec-to-join-obama-administration/
4) “Support for Obama Pays Off for World’s Creepiest Company”
Submitted by Ken Boehm on Wed, 09/08/2010
The entire high-tech world is pretty much commie/libertine. So why would Google be any different?
Easy way out of their “don’t be evil” code of ethics.
Just redefine what’s good and evil. No problem if you don’t have an objective standard!
Genesis 3:5
“For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
Because Google is cooperating and feeding data to the administration on request about user habits, primarily political opponents or politicians of interest. They are evil, period.
Don’t kid yourself. Google has been evil for a while now. They loves them some Socialism.
How big should a screen for text messaging be?
It is usually amusing to see people maintain your stance get a smartphone. I’ve probably heard “how did I get by without one?” 20 times in the last week from a buddy who just got an iPhone.
Another thread about metaphors addresses how word choices and the imagery they convey reveal so much about the mindset behind message. Google's higher-ups are remarkably stupid for backing this poorly chosen motto. Its operative word conveying imagery is "evil." Regardless of how many "don't"s they put in front of it, the imagery in the word "evil" is the one that's planted in the consumer's brain -- and is also the one that apparently rings most soundly with the people at google, which tells a lot about the company.
Leaders don't lead by telling people where NOT to go and what NOT to do. They lead or direct by advising what TO do, pointing the direction of where TO go.
I'd have a lot more confidence in a company whose motto was: "Do Good, Be Right." It would tell me that they knew what they were doing. When vows or declarations convey only what is NOT to be done, it means somebody is driving blindly.
lol
Spot on! I agree with you, Jeff C.
Many of these guys from America were/are SDS types. They avoided the draft, fled to Canada or stayed in college during Nam and sold out for $$$.
So much for wanting egalitarianism. They should donate not their SALARIES/INCOME but rather their WEALTH and INVESTMENT HOLDINGS to the federal government. How, for example, can Jane Fonda of all people not donate all production costs and profits from her NEW exercise video(s) to the State? Aren’t they for the betterment of the People?
"Don't be 'EVIL'."
I’ve been in IT for 15 years. I’ve seen desktop monitors go from 14” CRTs to the 22” widescreen LCDs like I’m using to type this. We went from being lucky to having one monochromatic screen to choosing between one, two, three, and sometimes four monitors for our desktops (I personally have 2).
Televisions: same thing. I had a 13 inch Daewoo TV when I was a kid. It still works great on my porch, but I prefer my 55 inch Samsung plasma hanging on the wall.
It’s about size, sure, but my issue is with price. I’m already shelling out $80 a month to Verizon for mine and my fiancee’s service, and neither one of us has a data plan. We don’t want it. We’re fiscal conservatives and see absolutely no point or necessity to have a phone that does that crap.
Also, I’ve been involved in information security, and smartphones and laptops are the number one way that sensitive data is stolen. I’ll keep my computers at home and use my phone to make calls.
In my opinion, the advancement of the cellphone stopped with Bluetooth.
Love Scroogle. Been using it for a while now. Especially enjoy the little Google put-downs that Scroogle displays on their page.
It would be impossible to excerpt the article worse than you did.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.