Yet ANOTHER purely U.S. article (see my comment on the previous article).Is this meant to be a blog on Google U.S. policy, or on international policy?Freeman (from the U.K.)
What time zone do the time stamps on the messages refer to? It's pointless putting times on the messages if the time zone is omitted - yet another U.S. bias! Shouldn't the displayed time adjust according to the *user's* time settings as most programs do?Freeman
freeman, with all due respect, yes, Google, an American company, that deals significantly with the various restrictions put onto it by the American legal system, will have a public policy blog that is significantly skewed towards the American political system. Expecting otherwise would be, and is, ridiculous. There are many other places to get your political fix for your region, rather then spamming messages onto a blog that doesn't fit your needs.Now then, on to posts regarding Mayor Bloomberg and the content from the video/article.
dj, with all due respect, yes Google is an American company, but with an international market. As I said in an earlier message, Google opened this blog by emphasising that it is "a multinational corporation" and that it wants to provide "a resource for policymakers around the world". Those are it's words - not mine. So if it wants this to be an international blog, then it should have international items.This isn't a case of getting my "political fix for [my] region" - it's a case of what are Google's international policies. If this were a blog about Google's U.S. policies, then your point would be well made - but as it says it is about international policies, then that's what I'm asking for.Yes it may be "skewed towards the American political system" - but that's still different from being (almost) exclusively about the American political system.Freeman
This comment has been removed by the author.
Freeman, this is a public blog, but not a public service. They write what they write because it is what they want to write. As the blog focuses on public policy, it is hardly irrational for them to focus almost exclusively on issues of public policy in the political and legal systems that most directly affect Google (and with which, doubtless, the majority of the Google Policy staff are best acquinted). But, while the specifics are American, the policy implications can often be global. If you're at all techie, I'm sure you grasp that.
Not to mention that Google's involvement with public policy is relatively new. They're going to prioritize American public policy before dealing extensively with other countries. I wouldn't be surprised if, some time from now, the company started blogs to discuss issues more specifically related to foreign (and the term is applicable given Google's American base) governments. In the meantime, this appears to neither be an "international" blog nor a "U.S." blog. It is a Google blog. It addresses the issues of most immediate importance to the company. At the moment, its primary energies, despite its multinational reach, are still focused in the United States.
The posts should be labeled, so we can find specific topics of interest.
Yet ANOTHER purely U.S. article (see my comment on the previous article).Is this meant to be a blog on Google U.S. policy, or on international policy?That's just the nature of the internet - it's still heavily US biased. Nearly every site one goes defaults to a US time zone.I actually find it more irritating going to another country and having Google auto-select a localised site when I have specifically typed in Google.com. If I wanted Google.ae, I would type that. Given that Arabic is a minority language in the UAE, it is crazy that Google keeps defaulting to that even when users type in the American/international address.
I imagine as it becomes prudent, google will launch a public policy blog on their .co.uk domain, their .cn domain, and any other locale it makes sense.
Many of the problems that we see on the Internet have a source in the USA. For instance, Canada is about to pass a DMCA-like law and it is largely because only one side (the pro-side) from the USA has decided to involved itself in Canadian politics. While the Canadian re-branding of the BSA, MPAA and RIAA (AKA: CAAST, CMPDA, CRIA) are here in force, the other side of the debate (FLOSS vendors, Google, etc) are not.We have seen Canadian parliamentary committee hearings that only saw one side of the debate, and managed to come out with a report titled "Counterfeiting and Piracy are theft" based on hearing only one side of the debate.I'm the policy coordinator for CLUE, Canada's Association for Free/Libre and Open Source Software, and have been doing this work entirely as a volunteer. Any help (from fellow Canadians, or from transnationals who have a stake in this) is greatly appreciated.
If you are interested in Mike Bloomberg, I encourage you to check out the growing Draft movement at Unite For Mike.
The comments on this blog belong only to the person who posted them. We do, however, reserve the right to remove off-topic or inappropriate comments.