View Single Post
  #33   Report Post  
Old October 28th 11, 02:33 AM posted to rec.radio.shortwave,rec.sport.golf,talk.politics.guns,alt.conspiracy
SaPeIsMa SaPeIsMa is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Feb 2010
Posts: 83
Default Stunning crime by government authorities, right out in the open, attack on free speech ...


"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
On 10/27/11 15:55 , SaPeIsMa wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
On 10/27/11 06:14 , SaPeIsMa wrote:




Google has a transparency report where requests for removal are
explained
http://www.google.com/transparencyre...nmentrequests/


"Google" and "transparency" are mutually exclusive terms.


Google is NOT the Government
It's a BUSINESS
It has NO NEED or DUTY to be ANYTHING..


While you may argue the point of need, or duty, that Google offers
a report claiming transparency, while being the second most
deceptive and disingenuous corporation on the planet would be
laughable if it weren't so tragic.


ANd who declared Google to be
"second most deceptive and disingenuous corporation on the planet "
And by what standard was this defintion made ??



By observation, experience, incomparison to other companies operating in
the US. That declaration was made by a number of privacy advocate, and
corporate watchdogs.

Google's track record in matters of integrity and transparency is only
marginally better than that of the Ethyl Corporation. Read the TOS for
Google. The privacy policies for Google. Then read the privacy policy for
one of their products like GMail. The contradictions and obfuscations are
quite striking.

And while many users read the TOS associated with a product, few bother
to delve into the policies of Google, itself. It takes some pretty
determined digging, to find the real intent of the policies and product
TOS for Google.

The mantra "Don't be evil," is laughable on its face.



If they're going to offer a 'transparency report,' they DO ideed
have a need and a duty to be transparent.


You seem to have a real issue with putting the cart before the horse.
Why is that ?


And requiring actual transparency of a company issuing a transparency
report is putting the cart before the horse?


1) They don't have to put one out
They CHOOSE to do so
2) Who would "require it of them" anyway ?


You must have been a dream student in your debate class.


Yeah !
I usually rolled over wooly thinkers like you....