back to article Occupy Google: Protesters attack ad giant as I/O gets underway

Google's I/O dev conference is traditionally a time when the company basks in the love of its community: but some other Bay Area residents have been making their displeasure with the Chocolate Factory known in a very vocal fashion. Occupy Google protestors "Give me a G..." A group working under the hashtag Occupy Google …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Shannon Jacobs

    How can I help fight the EVIL?

    As someone who used to think the google was going to make the world better... Well, I'm not sure what to say about it, but I'm definitely sad that the google is so EVIL now. It actually took a couple of years to persuade me they had gone to the dark side, so to speak, but it still saddens me. I actually noticed the first signs at least several years ago--and I still don't know what it was about, though I ask the google from time to time. They've stopped talking to peasants, obviously, but I think that's just a secondary symptom of the creeping EVIL.

    Originally my feeling was that the google was sort of innocent. As the system works in America, most businesspeople are fine and upstanding and just want to play fair, but the definition of "fair" has been attacked or even destroyed. The so-called rules of the business game in the US are written by the most cheaply bribed politicians working for the least ethical and greediest businessmen. They love the business model of cancer, and the only problem they understand is not solvable: No matter how much they rig the game, they will NEVER have enough money. Their love of money is insane, and they don't care that the cancer always kills its host.

    However, as I noted, originally I thought the google was sort of innocent. Then I found out the google has become the leading lobbyist among high tech companies. In other words, the google is now helping to write the crooked laws. If you know of any evidence to the contrary, let me know, but I haven't seen it yet. (Though some of their legislative initiatives seem to be neutral or at least not obviously EVIL, I suspect it's because I just can't see the rest of the picture, and some of the legislation they are pushing is clearly EVIL.)

    Constructive solution time (to be ignored, of course). A better economic model is evolutionary, not cancerous. It would also increase freedom (in the form of meaningful and unconstrained choice). If a company is sufficiently successful, the company should be obliged to reproduce, NOT simply continue with mindless and cancerous growth. Several ways to do it, though I think the amoeba offers one of the simplest models. The company splits into (at least) two independent entities that have to compete against each other, each evolving in its own ways and offering MORE choices and MORE freedom.

    1. eulampios

      Praesumptio innocentiae

      Then I found out the google has become the leading lobbyist among high tech companies. In other words, the google is now helping to write the crooked laws. If you know of any evidence to the contrary, let me know

      Doesn't that work the other way around, you are supposed to present the evidence of evilness of the defendant?

      IMHO, I am trying to say that with Microsoft, Apple and Oracle it's not that hard to be much LESS evil and Google is still one. Who knows if the table turns when/if the "(un)Holy Trinity" is gone ( can the Almighty be that merciful to us?) and Google might take their place.

      1. veti Silver badge

        Re: Praesumptio innocentiae

        For what it's worth, I concluded circa 2004 that I now trust Microsoft more than I trust Google.

        With Microsoft, I pay money and I get a product. I know what I pay, and I know what I'll get for it.

        With Google, I get a service. And for the most part, it's a good service. But what do I pay? That's the honking big question, and one that's literally impossible to answer. Not only do they not publish a price list, they go to extravagant lengths to keep it top secret.

        Microsoft is expensive, no question - but at least I can go into that relationship with my eyes open. Google doesn't give me the option.

        1. eulampios

          Re: Praesumptio innocentiae

          But what do I pay? That's the honking big question, and one that's literally impossible to answer.

          And yes what do you pay exactly? I can't answer many questions myself. So what?

          I tell you I pay with my two (oops it's now three) free gmail accounts: NOT A THING! Because I use good ol' IMAP (with both mutt and, recently, with GNUS clients ) + SMTP handled by Postfix.

          As far as MS is concerned there is some price to pay though for their unfair domination and it is not only limited by the Windows Tax which many reluctantly pay with their eyes widely open.

          1. veti Silver badge

            Re: Praesumptio innocentiae

            You pay NOT A THING! indeed, if that's the value to you of your privacy and control of your own data.

            Who is your data being shared with? What would happen if Google decides to change its terms of service to consolidate one Gmail account per person? What's to stop them from doing that?

            Like I say - Google goes out of its way to keep you from knowing the answers to those questions.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: How can I help fight the EVIL?

      For supporters of Google :-

      Copyright minister admits: Google has better access to No. 10 than me


      "US is an oligarchy, not a democracy"

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: How can I help fight the EVIL?

      Perhaps you should build your own company and show us and Google how it should be done. Reality check, Google is a publicly traded company. No one invests in a company that does NOT look to grow/advance it's revenues. Don't think you are an investor? If your company provides you with retirement, then you should educate yourself about where those monies are invested. Clue: The are NOT simply sitting in a back-room.


      Don't like a company or how it does business. Then don't use it's FREE services.

      No one is forcing you to use ANY of Google's products/services. There are plenty of other options and you can always purchase software, so it's NOT supported by Ad revenue.

      /end rant

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        'Then don't use it's FREE services.'

        YANI:.... Yet another naive idiot.... making dangersous assumptions! How many are there on the Reg, infinite it seems! Listen up @AC:

        1. You can't avoid your emails ending up at a Google hosted service i.e. gmail via website redirection.

        2. You can't escape all Super-Cookies and Server-Side Google Analytics, even by using Hosts file & Web-Browser blockers!

  2. dan1980

    Correct me if I have read this incorrectly but are these people really protesting because they feel Google hasn't been vociferous enough in its support of 'net neutrality?

    So, they know that Google isn't against net neutrality but think they should be even more against it . . . ?

    1. dan1980

      Sorry - "even more not against it".

      It was a deliberately messy construction (in an attempt to highlight the oddness of it) but it caught me out!

    2. Turtle

      @ dan1980

      "Correct me if I have read this incorrectly but are these people really protesting because they feel Google hasn't been vociferous enough in its support of 'net neutrality?"

      And be quite sure to ignore the part about Google shyster lawyer Jack Halprin evicting tenants from their homes - which is just part of the story about how Google has been helping make housing even more difficult to afford than it already is...

      Oops, sorry! Needless advice: I see you did ignore it.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: @ dan1980

        That's Jack Halprin acting as a private citizen with his private investment that hasn't nothing to do with the company that currently employs him yeah?

        Maybe Google should set up an online form where any sort of malfeasance large or small by any of it's employees at any level and in any arena can be entered anonymously and immediately result in a sacking. Maybe perfect personal purity should be militantly enforced at all of Google's suppliers as well.

        The worst thing... I heard that George W. Bush once Googled something, how can you trust in any way a company that would let somebody like him use it.


      2. fandom

        Re: @ dan1980

        "And be quite sure to ignore the part about Google shyster lawyer Jack Halprin evicting tenants from their homes"

        How do you feel about companies monitoring what their employees do in their free time?

      3. Gannon (J.) Dick

        Re: @ dan1980

        Ignored this too ...

        According to the protestors Google said that they were welcome to stay but might get wet from the firm's garden sprinkler system. But as night came the local police turned out and broke up the protest, with 10 arrests for trespassing reported.


        California is famous for a "Three Strikes" law, but if you are big enough and evil enough then "Three Squared Plus One" arrest records which will ruin any future prospects of these Little People stupid enough to believe in corporate slogans is a small price to pay for Law And Order.

      4. dan1980

        Re: @ dan1980


        Re: Jack Halprin.

        Even if Mr. Halprin's endeavours were conducted under the instruction of Google, my question/comment still stands.

        Google are guilty of many bad practices but these protesters were there to complain about Net Neutrality and my comment was that, they are effectively complaining that Google haven't done enough. Not that they oppose net neutrality, but that they aren't supporting it as strongly as these people would like.

        This protest, so far as I can tell, has nothing at all to do with Jack Halprin so I really don't know why you brought it up.

        I ignored it because it was not relevant to the protest, the article or my comment.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward


      Google have done more to fight net neutrality than either Microsoft, Facebook, Apple and Yahoo combined.

      They should be thanking them, and protesting at the other companies mentioned...

      What surprises me in all this, that it's got equal coverage to all the really good stuff that was presented yesterday.

      Pathetic is not even close.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Plebs

        "What surprises me in all this, that it's got equal coverage to all the really good stuff that was presented yesterday."

        Yes, it's called balance.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Plebs

          Flat earther on line 2 ready for his rebuttal.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Plebs

        What surprises me in all this, that it's got equal coverage to all the really good stuff that was presented yesterday.

        A natural consequence of being evil, I think.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I don't quite get what people expect of Google. They are a company, nothing more, nothing less. Google may try to hide behind "Don't be evil" but ultimately they are there to make money. Which they do very well.

    If they really did try have some moral stance, they could have stuck with non-targeting advertising, charging for services that they currently give away for free etc. They would still have made money, just not as much. But somehow it has become the norm that you sell your privacy in exchange for free stuff that enables Google to make even more money and research into stuff that seems to have them look like Lord of the 'Net. (I now have a parody of 'One ring to rule them all and in the darkness bind them' running through my head).

    Google are not the internet, despite what a large proportion of the public think. They are just another large company that is driven by profit. Their time is now. At some point, it will do an IBM. When that happens there will be another company ruling the roost. Hopefully by licensing Anti-Grav and flying cars and hover-boards will be around and plentiful.

    I would like to think there are companies who make a profit but don't make that the only reason they exist, but I am not silly enough to think Google is one of them.

    I may search the web on that using Duckduckgo....

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Agree, its time to wake up. For supporters of Google :-

    Copyright minister admits: Google has better access to No. 10 than me


    "US is an oligarchy, not a democracy"

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Agree, its time to wake up. For supporters of Google :-

      Hmmm it is certainly time to wake up for the supporters of the copyright minister and number 10.

  5. Lionel Baden

    how much traffic does google use ?

    And why Havn't any of the providers tried to charge google ??

  6. oblivion
    Thumb Down

    All large companies are evil (mostly anyway)

    Google is no better or worse than many. But IMHO since they practically OWN a large portion of the Internet (or at least as much as it can be owned by providing services and collecting information), they really should be trying harder not only to "not be evil", but to be a more positive force. In the end their indifference, whether real or just perceived, will bite them in the ass, as it can and does with all of us when we can make a difference and choose to be ambivalent.

    Google really should distance themselves from Halprin though. He seems to embody all the negative stereotypes that people associate with scuzzy lawyers. Firing him would be a nice gesture towards making us all believe that Google really strives to not be evil.

    It's just a shame that Karma is so slow acting..

  7. Alan Denman

    iPhones left at home?

    Well we are indeed left to wonder about that low 'occupancy' rate of 1.

  8. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge


    A hodgepodge of grievances, none of them well-thought out, most based on emotional reactions and hearsay?


  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Thing is that Google only indexes about 2-3% of the internet, that's quite staggering how much power they wield by just telling us about that small fraction that's so important to us.

  10. StimuliC

    Can't blame tech companies solely!

    San Francisco house prices have been high for a long time, a lot longer than the tech companies have been there. In fact they were high before the 2nd World War relative to other areas. Why? Well the trouble with San Francisco there is a finite amount of real estate and nowhere for expansion! This pushes the prices up both for rental and purchase.

    The biggest offender that pushes the prices up is the City itself and home owners associations etc. The HOA that fight the development of any spare land that may ruin their vistas in case it lowers the prices of their properties and makes them less desirable. The City that has some many rules that means that San Francisco that homes much of the Tech employee's has so many rules and costly permits that makes it difficult and excessively costly for a developer to run services to new land that they may want to develop.

    Finally and worst of the bunch is the Realtors that push the prices ever higher with dollars signs in their eyes aiming for ever higher commissions. That's the biggest offenders in the housing market everywhere in the USA. Realtors that make the home prices a little higher each time.

    Where I am living a lowly desert City during the last housing boom the Realtors had pushed the prices for homes from a reasonable amount to prices that were two or three times the price of homes in Malibu etc. A Malibu ranch house on 5 acres was just $300-500 thousand while a house on 1/8th acre in a housing development out here was $800,000 to $1.8 Million. When the bubble burst these home prices plummets to 1/8th of the price and some even lower than that. The only people that were okay afterwards were the realtors that have already started pushing the prices back up and even now the cheapest home is back up to $300,000 with them pushing the prices up and I am sure that the same applies up in San Francisco.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Can't blame tech companies solely!

      LOL. So you blame the Realtors now? Do you even understand the concept of supply and demand?

      It's the home owners and the buyers that choose/drive the prices. If a home/product is overpriced, it simply won't sell. Obviously someone is willing to pay the asking prices.

      Try less blame in your life.

      ~Best wishes.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

  11. Cipher

    I have a problem with much of what Google does... I choose not use their products or services. I can do everything I need/want to do without them.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I Wonder

    Looks like the shine is coming off the Google sweetie-factory image and the mud is starting to stick.

    Of course, Google will always have the love of the trendy hipsters who would start shaking with positive rage were anyone to tell them that Google was anything less than world-savingly wonderful.

    Who knows, maybe the impossible will happen and as Apple and Google start to lose their Teflon coating, Microsoft could start to be seen as the least worst option?

  13. Lamont Cranston

    I'm sure that the "I'm being evicted by your arsehole lawyer" protester

    was thrilled to be sharing a stage with the "Google are building killer robots" loon.

  14. Tank boy

    Give me a break

    Google is a business, plain and simple. If an employee wants to get into real estate because he/she has the cash, that's up to them. Tired of the cost of living in the greater San Fransisco area is going up? Sorry, Google is providing jobs right here in the USA. Stuff it.

    1. Where not exists

      Re: Give me a break

      Agreed. Google is just another corportation. But Google has also branded itself as something of a do gooder. The do gooder image is in conflict with its business image. Google management will need to figure out how to reconcile the two in order to retain the popular support the company has long enjoyed. It will be interesting to see what they do and the result that they arrive at.

      1. MissingSecurity

        Re: Give me a break

        Yes, marketing has a nice catch phrase, but from a general corporate standpoint (for how much power Google really does have) Google's not doing too bad. They have there hand in everything and it's easy to point problems and say "That thing I don't like invalidates everything you try to do." I don't see companies like Apple and Microsoft challenging the status quo of things (back to cars, fiber, etc) they are focused on what they've done in the past. I don't doubt we will see some good tech in the future from MS or Apple, but I doubt I'll see Apple or MS trying to challenge ISP's even if its just to sell me more ads.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Go Home, Attention Wh*res

    Go Home, Attention Wh*res. Especially those of you carrying Android phones and posting up your antics on G+ and sending emails home to your parents via Gmail.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It's a legitimate

    as far as businesses go , i guesses they are as evil as any other company. But I must stress that their revenue model IS ad based, and that the advances in neural network coupled with world wide west surveillance totalitarism automatically makes the company who has a quasi monopoly on a lot of services on the internet an accomplice. And in fact they were a more help in the whole NWO operation or however journalists coin it nowadays. where they started to seem a bit iffy (to employ a euphemism) relates to:

    - mapping , the email/router mapping incident.

    - Gmail sniffing.

    - youtube preferences neural network

    - purchase of Boston Dynamics

    - buying satellites?

    - dodging tax (but this is a much wider issue)

    - Cooperation with no warning to customers with the government crooks

    they have the right to operate within the law as a company but they are clearly steering the laws their desired direction as an ad company. And the fact that they led a 'fake' compaign saying look at us we didn't abide by these takedown requests by X or Y government while consealing the actual numbers and denying giving direct access to NSA/etc is just disgusting.

    And this is for a (tech) company who wants to 'not be evil' what about all the other tech giants?and then again, who knows who's putting these pressures on the company to behave in this manner? the shareholders? government? somebody needs to blow the whistle !

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021