DEV Community

loading...

Okay! We need to discuss "Google's congressional hearing"

sarthology profile image Sarthak Sharma ・1 min read

Google's congressional hearing occurred on 11 Dec. Here are the few highlights:

What are your thoughts about it?

In case, You want to listen whole hearing.

Discussion (23)

pic
Editor guide
Collapse
kspeakman profile image
Kasey Speakman • Edited

I see almost no value in these hearings. I deplore Google's data collection practices. But these officials are just verbally beating up another human for the camera. It's gross.

Collapse
david_j_eddy profile image
David J Eddy

110%, Not once has a Congressional hearing about anything tech related resulted in an informed conversation. When the people asking the questions ha no idea what they are talking about it just makes fools out of all of us.

Collapse
iankurbiswas profile image
Ankur Biswas

Well looks like Congress blew it's hearing with Google CEO Mr. Sundar Pichai.

Collapse
ben profile image
Ben Halpern

Yes, this was an opportunity to introduce some accountability and it was a total farce.

Collapse
exbe profile image
exbe

Don't care.

Collapse
awwsmm profile image
Andrew (he/him)

You cared enough to leave a dismissive comment

Collapse
exbe profile image
exbe

Communicating is not caring

Collapse
elmuerte profile image
Michiel Hendriks

You mean laugh at this, right? Because it is kind of a joke even though it should be a serious thing.

Collapse
sarthology profile image
Sarthak Sharma Author

Maybe people asking questions, are wrong.

Collapse
abrahambrookes profile image
Abraham Brookes

IT'S NOT A BIG TRUCK

Collapse
utkarsh profile image
Utkarsh Talwar • Edited

At least it wasn't as bad as the Zuckerberg hearing. XD

youtube.com/watch?v=ncbb5B85sd0

That last bit is so ridiculous.
But I do agree, they blew it this time as well.

Collapse
krofdrakula profile image
Klemen Slavič • Edited

Are we not talking about the real villain in this story?

Collapse
dotnetcoreblog profile image
Jamie

The problem with folks who do this is that they detract from the conversation taking place.

Seriously, I've seen more discussion about this guy than any of the points raised during the congressional hearing.

Collapse
krofdrakula profile image
Klemen Slavič

True. But the article is basically just throwing videos into the ring and shouting "DISCUSS!". Without any kind of concrete prompt, it's hard to have a focused conversation in the first place.

It would be better to focus the conversation to a one or two issues, or break out the discussion into separate articles, not just post three summary videos that encompass the entire moral and ethical minefield of handling privacy in an always-connected and corporation-dominated world.

And life doesn't have to be all serious all the time. You can still have a serious conversation about topics while having an occasional laugh.

Thread Thread
sarthology profile image
Thread Thread
dotnetcoreblog profile image
Jamie

And life doesn't have to be all serious all the time. You can still have a serious conversation about topics while having an occasional laugh.

That is completely true. Except that a lot of the folks who are commenting about the dude in the background are media outlets, completely skirting the chance for an intelligent discussion about the points raised in the hearing.

(and not just the part of the hearing where a senator blames Google for an app which his granddaughter was playing on her iPhone)

Thread Thread
krofdrakula profile image
Klemen Slavič

Right, and that's fine, I'm just saying that without a specific thing to talk about in this article, you're basically opening everything up to interpretation.

To be clear: I'm not trying to sabotage the conversation or think it's a waste of time, but the scope is too large to start a meaningful conversation, as evidenced by the other comments on this thread.

If you want to improve your chances of constructive debate on the subject, make sure you guide participants into a specific topic. A much better prompt here would be to give your initial opinion on the video(s), to which people could refer.

Thread Thread
sarthology profile image
Sarthak Sharma Author

Hey, relax man 😃. I think you misinterpreted it. I said that I already had a discussion on the serious aspect of it. This discussion, on the other hand, I wanted to be open. So from my side, your goofy comments are also welcome.

Thread Thread
krofdrakula profile image
Klemen Slavič

True, hard to read emotions over a low-bandwidth link like text. 🙂

Collapse
david_j_eddy profile image
David J Eddy

And way less robotic. :)

Collapse
darkwiiplayer profile image
DarkWiiPlayer • Edited

As a suggestion: Not everybody can or wants to watch youtube videos, whether it's because they're at work, in a public space, or on a device with no audio output. It'd be a good idea to add at least some rudimentary description of what happens in the video, or maybe even partial or full transcripts of what is said.

EDIT: Also some context for those of us from outside the USA would be very much appreciated. Keep in mind that this kind of thing usually doesn't get nearly as much news coverage in other countries, even if it's about google.

Collapse
sarthology profile image
Sarthak Sharma Author

That' true, especially in Developing countries like India. Huge user base but zero awareness.