Julian Assange: Google is not what it seems (part six, final)
Google "other." Google "look into the future." Google "has a future." Google is "more than just a company." Google "pays tribute to society." Google - "the power of good."
Even when Google showed its corporate division of feelings to the public, this did not greatly affect the faith in the company. Her reputation is seemingly unshakable. The colorful, playful Google logo is imprinted on the retina of human eyes a little less than six billion times every day, 2.1 trillion times a year — an opportunity for processing that no other company has ever seen [ approx. figures are for 2013 ]. Caught by the hand with petabytes of personal data that were open to government intelligence through the PRISM program last year, Google nonetheless continues without much effort to stay at the same level due to its “don't be evil” demagogy. Several symbolic open letters to the White House, and everything seems to be forgiven. Even fighters with surveillance cannot help themselves by denouncing government espionage and at the same time trying to change Google’s aggressive surveillance practices using the peacemaker’s strategy [ app. this is about Edward Snowden and his interview a month after escaping from the NSA ].
No one wants to admit that Google has grown big and nasty. But it is. During his tenure as CEO at Google, Eric Schmidt managed to integrate the company with the shadow structures of the US government, as it grows into a geographically aggressive megacorporation. However, Google has always been comfortable with such intimacy. Long before Larry Page and Sergey Brin hired Schmidt in 2001 — their initial research on which Google was founded was partly funded by the DARPA Agency (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Advanced Defense Research Projects Agency) [ app. other investors can be found in section “7. Acknowledgments "of the description of the student project of a search engine from 1998 ]. And even considering that under Schmidt, Google acquired the image of an overly friendly technology giant, all this time there was a close relationship with the intelligence community.
')
By 2013, the NSA began to systematically violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), under the supervision of General Michael Hayden . These were the days of "total information awareness" [approx. “Total Information Awareness” - a radical program of spying on individuals in order to identify their possible behavior, was launched after September 11 under the authority of DARPA. Although she was stopped in 2003 in connection with the protests, its foundation could serve for the future mass surveillance of the NSA ]. Before the PRISM program was even conceived, by the order of the White House Bush, the NSA was already ready to “collect, sniff, learn, process and use everything ” [app. quote from Edward Snowden's video message ]. At the same time period, Google, which declared its corporate mission to collect and “streamline all global information, making it publicly available and useful,” accepts payments from the NSA in the amount of $ 2 million for providing the Agency with search tools for quickly processing stolen knowledge base.
In 2004, Google acquired Keyhole, a cartographic startup based on funds from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and the CIA. On its basis, the Google Earth program was created, an enterprise version of which Google sold to the Pentagon, and also received millions of contracts from federal and state agencies. In 2008, with the support of Google, the first NGA space satellite called GeoEye-1 was launched, the company shared its images with the US military and intelligence. In 2010, NGA awarded Google a $ 27 million "contract for geospatial services".
In 2010, when the Chinese government was accused of a hacker attack on Google, the company entered into a "formal information exchange" relationship with the NSA, which allowed Agency analysts to make a "vulnerability assessment" of Google software and hardware. And although the terms of the deal were not disclosed, the NSA invited other agencies to help, including the FBI and the Department of National Security.
Around the same time, Google is starting to participate in a program called the Enduring Security Framework (ESF), which has created a network of fast information exchange between Silicon Valley companies and Pentagon branch agencies. Emails received in 2014 show that Schmidt and Sergey Brin communicate freely with General Keith Alexander, the head of the NSA about the ESF program. In the investigation of the letters received, emphasis is placed on familiarity in the correspondence between these people. "General Keith ... so glad to see you ...!" Wrote Schmidt ( "General Keith ... so great to see you ...!" ). But most correspondence reports miss key detail. “Your ideas as a key member of the military-industrial base,” wrote Alexander Brinu, “have a great price, as they provide a tangible return to the ESF”.
The Department of State Security defines the defense industry base as "a global manufacturing facility that allows for research and development, as well as the design, production, delivery, and support of military weapons systems, subsystems, and parts and components to meet US military requirements ."
Screenshot from Eric Schmidt’s instagram video dated May 2, 2014, with a demonstration of one of the first versions of the famous robots of the Boston Dynamics company, which Google, according to the latest news, sells
The defense industrial base provides "products and services that are important for mobilizing, deploying and supporting military operations." Does this include regular commercial services provided by the US military? Not. The definition specifically excludes the purchase of commercial services. Whatever Google does is a “key member of the defense industry base”, it’s definitely not a campaign to promote Google AdWords or verification of Gmail-accounts of soldiers.
In 2012, Google entered the main lobby list in Washington - usually only the US Chamber of Commerce, military contractors and hydrocarbon leviathans are eligible for this list . Google was on the list above military space giant Lockheed Martin, spending $ 18.2 million, compared with 15.3 million Lockheed Martin. Boeing, a military contractor who swallowed McDonnell Douglas in 1997, was also lower, with spending of 15.6 million; Northrop Grumman [ app. Help from Wiki: Northrop Grumman Corporation - American military-industrial company operating in the field of electronics and information technology, aerospace, shipbuilding ] also turned out to be lower, spending $ 17.5 million.
In the fall of 2013, the Obama administration tried to get approval for air strikes in Syria. Despite the setbacks, the administration continued to insist on hostilities in September in speeches and public speeches by President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry. On September 10, Google lent its homepage - the most popular page on the Internet - to support the war, by posting “Live!” Under the search box. Secretary Kerry answers questions on Syria. Today, at 2 pm, through the Hangout ”( “ Live Secretary General answer questions on Syria. Today via Hangout at 2pm ET. ” ) [ App. Assange notes that, among other things, this case violates the first of Google’s 10 corporate “ commandments ”: “The interface of our home page is simple and straightforward, and the pages load instantly. Places in the search results are not sold to anyone, advertising is always marked as such and filled with relevant content so as not to distract ” ].
Google homepage September 10, 2013
The New York Times columnist, and as he calls himself a “radical centrist,” Tom Friedman, described the relationship between US technology companies and the government in 1999 as something akin to a “free market”:
And if something has changed since these words were written, it is that the Valley has grown out of its passive role and is trying to tame this “invisible fist”, becoming something of a velvet glove for it. So, in 2013, Schmidt and Cohen state:
This is just one of many bold statements made by Schmidt and Cohen in their book, which was eventually published in April 2013. The working title “Empire of the Mind” has changed to “New Digital Era: Changing the Future of People, Nations and Business.” By the time she was released, I managed to seek and obtain political asylum from the government of Ecuador and take refuge in their embassy in London. At that time, I spent a year in their embassy under the supervision of the police, who blocked the safe exit from the United Kingdom. Already on the Web, I noticed a buzzing press that reacted to the book, thoughtlessly not paying attention to digital imperialism in the title and pre-publication praise from famous war-instigators like Tony Blair , Henry Kissinger, Bill Heyden and Madeleine Albright ( Madeleine Albright).
Eric Schmidt and Henry Kissinger, secretary of state and head of the National Security Council under Richard Nixon, during a “casual chat” - meeting with employees at the main Google office in Mountain View, California, September 30, 2013
Announced as a visionary forecast of the scientific and technical future, the book does not fulfill its intended purpose. One cannot even imagine a future, good or bad, that would be different from the present. This book is a simplified fusion of Fukuyama’s “ end of history ” ideology - fashionable in the 90s - and fast mobile phones. On it are smeared out the beaten slogans of the District of Columbia, the orthodoxy of the State Department, and flattering advances to Henry Kissinger. Content is low - even unprofitable. This did not seem to fit the profile of Schmidt, that harsh, quiet man in my living room. But reading, I began to understand that this book is not a serious attempt to look into the future. It was a love song from Google to Washington. Google, the burgeoning digital superpower, is proposing Washington to become its geopolitical visionary.
On the one hand, it is just a business. For the monopoly of American Internet services, in order to provide global influence, it is not enough just to continue to do what they did and allow politicians to take care of themselves. American strategic and economic dominance becomes for these companies the most important support in their own dominant position in the market. What do megacorporations do? If she wants to saddle the world, she needs to become part of the original “empire of good” (“don't be evil” empire).
But part of Google’s vibrant image of “more than just a company” comes from the feeling that this company cannot be something big and mean. Its tendency to lure people into their traps with gigabytes of "free storage" creates the impression that Google gives out services for free, acting contrary to considerations of corporate good. Google is perceived as a purely charitable enterprise - a magical engine, driven by mysterious dreamers - leading to a utopian future. At times, the company begins to anxiously cultivate this image, infusing finance into “corporate responsibility” initiatives in order to produce “social change” —as an example would be Google Ideas. But Google Ideas shows that the company's “charitable” efforts also bring an awkward closeness to the imperialist side of American influence. If Blackwater / Xe Services / Academi [ approx. a hired security company that has acquired notoriety for killing civilians in Iraq ] will launch a program like Google Ideas, it will certainly meet a barrage of criticism. But for some reason, Google is open.
[ approx. Footnote: Utopianism often borders on delusions of grandeur. So, Larry Page publicly expressed his vision of Google micro-states, like the Jurassic Park: “The laws ... they cannot be right if they are 50 years old; They appeared before the Internet. [...] Maybe we could separate a piece of the world ... [...] and create an environment where people can do something new? I think we, as technologically advanced people, should have a safe place to do new things and learn how they will affect society, what impact they will have on people — without having to be deployed around the world. ” ]
Whether Google is just a company or “more than just a company,” its political aspirations are closely intertwined in the foreign policy agenda of the world's largest superpower. As Google’s monopoly of search and other Internet services grows, while industrial surveillance spans the growing population of the planet, the fast-growing mobile market, and the start of the world’s network coverage campaign, Google is becoming synonymous with the word “internet” for more and more people. The company's ability to influence the choice and behavior of a person gives it the power to influence the course of history.
If the future of the Internet is to become Google it is a reason to start worrying for people all over the world: in Latin America, in East and Southeast Asia, in India, in the Middle East, in equatorial Africa, in the countries of the former Soviet Union and even in Europe - for all those for whom the Internet embodies the hope of an alternative to American culture, economics and strategic dominance.
The “empire of good” remains an empire.
More information:
Original excerpt on WikiLeaks
"When Google Met WikiLeaks" in its entirety ($ 10)
The first part of the translation
The second part of the translation
Third part of the translation
Fourth part translation
Fifth part of the translation
Even when Google showed its corporate division of feelings to the public, this did not greatly affect the faith in the company. Her reputation is seemingly unshakable. The colorful, playful Google logo is imprinted on the retina of human eyes a little less than six billion times every day, 2.1 trillion times a year — an opportunity for processing that no other company has ever seen [ approx. figures are for 2013 ]. Caught by the hand with petabytes of personal data that were open to government intelligence through the PRISM program last year, Google nonetheless continues without much effort to stay at the same level due to its “don't be evil” demagogy. Several symbolic open letters to the White House, and everything seems to be forgiven. Even fighters with surveillance cannot help themselves by denouncing government espionage and at the same time trying to change Google’s aggressive surveillance practices using the peacemaker’s strategy [ app. this is about Edward Snowden and his interview a month after escaping from the NSA ].
No one wants to admit that Google has grown big and nasty. But it is. During his tenure as CEO at Google, Eric Schmidt managed to integrate the company with the shadow structures of the US government, as it grows into a geographically aggressive megacorporation. However, Google has always been comfortable with such intimacy. Long before Larry Page and Sergey Brin hired Schmidt in 2001 — their initial research on which Google was founded was partly funded by the DARPA Agency (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Advanced Defense Research Projects Agency) [ app. other investors can be found in section “7. Acknowledgments "of the description of the student project of a search engine from 1998 ]. And even considering that under Schmidt, Google acquired the image of an overly friendly technology giant, all this time there was a close relationship with the intelligence community.
')
By 2013, the NSA began to systematically violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), under the supervision of General Michael Hayden . These were the days of "total information awareness" [approx. “Total Information Awareness” - a radical program of spying on individuals in order to identify their possible behavior, was launched after September 11 under the authority of DARPA. Although she was stopped in 2003 in connection with the protests, its foundation could serve for the future mass surveillance of the NSA ]. Before the PRISM program was even conceived, by the order of the White House Bush, the NSA was already ready to “collect, sniff, learn, process and use everything ” [app. quote from Edward Snowden's video message ]. At the same time period, Google, which declared its corporate mission to collect and “streamline all global information, making it publicly available and useful,” accepts payments from the NSA in the amount of $ 2 million for providing the Agency with search tools for quickly processing stolen knowledge base.
In 2004, Google acquired Keyhole, a cartographic startup based on funds from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and the CIA. On its basis, the Google Earth program was created, an enterprise version of which Google sold to the Pentagon, and also received millions of contracts from federal and state agencies. In 2008, with the support of Google, the first NGA space satellite called GeoEye-1 was launched, the company shared its images with the US military and intelligence. In 2010, NGA awarded Google a $ 27 million "contract for geospatial services".
In 2010, when the Chinese government was accused of a hacker attack on Google, the company entered into a "formal information exchange" relationship with the NSA, which allowed Agency analysts to make a "vulnerability assessment" of Google software and hardware. And although the terms of the deal were not disclosed, the NSA invited other agencies to help, including the FBI and the Department of National Security.
Around the same time, Google is starting to participate in a program called the Enduring Security Framework (ESF), which has created a network of fast information exchange between Silicon Valley companies and Pentagon branch agencies. Emails received in 2014 show that Schmidt and Sergey Brin communicate freely with General Keith Alexander, the head of the NSA about the ESF program. In the investigation of the letters received, emphasis is placed on familiarity in the correspondence between these people. "General Keith ... so glad to see you ...!" Wrote Schmidt ( "General Keith ... so great to see you ...!" ). But most correspondence reports miss key detail. “Your ideas as a key member of the military-industrial base,” wrote Alexander Brinu, “have a great price, as they provide a tangible return to the ESF”.
The Department of State Security defines the defense industry base as "a global manufacturing facility that allows for research and development, as well as the design, production, delivery, and support of military weapons systems, subsystems, and parts and components to meet US military requirements ."
Screenshot from Eric Schmidt’s instagram video dated May 2, 2014, with a demonstration of one of the first versions of the famous robots of the Boston Dynamics company, which Google, according to the latest news, sells
The defense industrial base provides "products and services that are important for mobilizing, deploying and supporting military operations." Does this include regular commercial services provided by the US military? Not. The definition specifically excludes the purchase of commercial services. Whatever Google does is a “key member of the defense industry base”, it’s definitely not a campaign to promote Google AdWords or verification of Gmail-accounts of soldiers.
In 2012, Google entered the main lobby list in Washington - usually only the US Chamber of Commerce, military contractors and hydrocarbon leviathans are eligible for this list . Google was on the list above military space giant Lockheed Martin, spending $ 18.2 million, compared with 15.3 million Lockheed Martin. Boeing, a military contractor who swallowed McDonnell Douglas in 1997, was also lower, with spending of 15.6 million; Northrop Grumman [ app. Help from Wiki: Northrop Grumman Corporation - American military-industrial company operating in the field of electronics and information technology, aerospace, shipbuilding ] also turned out to be lower, spending $ 17.5 million.
In the fall of 2013, the Obama administration tried to get approval for air strikes in Syria. Despite the setbacks, the administration continued to insist on hostilities in September in speeches and public speeches by President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry. On September 10, Google lent its homepage - the most popular page on the Internet - to support the war, by posting “Live!” Under the search box. Secretary Kerry answers questions on Syria. Today, at 2 pm, through the Hangout ”( “ Live Secretary General answer questions on Syria. Today via Hangout at 2pm ET. ” ) [ App. Assange notes that, among other things, this case violates the first of Google’s 10 corporate “ commandments ”: “The interface of our home page is simple and straightforward, and the pages load instantly. Places in the search results are not sold to anyone, advertising is always marked as such and filled with relevant content so as not to distract ” ].
Google homepage September 10, 2013
The New York Times columnist, and as he calls himself a “radical centrist,” Tom Friedman, described the relationship between US technology companies and the government in 1999 as something akin to a “free market”:
The invisible hand of the market will never work without an invisible fist. McDonnell cannot thrive without McDonnell Douglas, the F-15 designer. And the hidden fist that keeps the thriving technological world of Silicon Valley safe is called the US Army and the Marine Corps.
And if something has changed since these words were written, it is that the Valley has grown out of its passive role and is trying to tame this “invisible fist”, becoming something of a velvet glove for it. So, in 2013, Schmidt and Cohen state:
What Lockheed Martin was for the twentieth century, technology companies and companies specializing in information security will be for the twenty-first.
This is just one of many bold statements made by Schmidt and Cohen in their book, which was eventually published in April 2013. The working title “Empire of the Mind” has changed to “New Digital Era: Changing the Future of People, Nations and Business.” By the time she was released, I managed to seek and obtain political asylum from the government of Ecuador and take refuge in their embassy in London. At that time, I spent a year in their embassy under the supervision of the police, who blocked the safe exit from the United Kingdom. Already on the Web, I noticed a buzzing press that reacted to the book, thoughtlessly not paying attention to digital imperialism in the title and pre-publication praise from famous war-instigators like Tony Blair , Henry Kissinger, Bill Heyden and Madeleine Albright ( Madeleine Albright).
Eric Schmidt and Henry Kissinger, secretary of state and head of the National Security Council under Richard Nixon, during a “casual chat” - meeting with employees at the main Google office in Mountain View, California, September 30, 2013
Announced as a visionary forecast of the scientific and technical future, the book does not fulfill its intended purpose. One cannot even imagine a future, good or bad, that would be different from the present. This book is a simplified fusion of Fukuyama’s “ end of history ” ideology - fashionable in the 90s - and fast mobile phones. On it are smeared out the beaten slogans of the District of Columbia, the orthodoxy of the State Department, and flattering advances to Henry Kissinger. Content is low - even unprofitable. This did not seem to fit the profile of Schmidt, that harsh, quiet man in my living room. But reading, I began to understand that this book is not a serious attempt to look into the future. It was a love song from Google to Washington. Google, the burgeoning digital superpower, is proposing Washington to become its geopolitical visionary.
On the one hand, it is just a business. For the monopoly of American Internet services, in order to provide global influence, it is not enough just to continue to do what they did and allow politicians to take care of themselves. American strategic and economic dominance becomes for these companies the most important support in their own dominant position in the market. What do megacorporations do? If she wants to saddle the world, she needs to become part of the original “empire of good” (“don't be evil” empire).
But part of Google’s vibrant image of “more than just a company” comes from the feeling that this company cannot be something big and mean. Its tendency to lure people into their traps with gigabytes of "free storage" creates the impression that Google gives out services for free, acting contrary to considerations of corporate good. Google is perceived as a purely charitable enterprise - a magical engine, driven by mysterious dreamers - leading to a utopian future. At times, the company begins to anxiously cultivate this image, infusing finance into “corporate responsibility” initiatives in order to produce “social change” —as an example would be Google Ideas. But Google Ideas shows that the company's “charitable” efforts also bring an awkward closeness to the imperialist side of American influence. If Blackwater / Xe Services / Academi [ approx. a hired security company that has acquired notoriety for killing civilians in Iraq ] will launch a program like Google Ideas, it will certainly meet a barrage of criticism. But for some reason, Google is open.
[ approx. Footnote: Utopianism often borders on delusions of grandeur. So, Larry Page publicly expressed his vision of Google micro-states, like the Jurassic Park: “The laws ... they cannot be right if they are 50 years old; They appeared before the Internet. [...] Maybe we could separate a piece of the world ... [...] and create an environment where people can do something new? I think we, as technologically advanced people, should have a safe place to do new things and learn how they will affect society, what impact they will have on people — without having to be deployed around the world. ” ]
Whether Google is just a company or “more than just a company,” its political aspirations are closely intertwined in the foreign policy agenda of the world's largest superpower. As Google’s monopoly of search and other Internet services grows, while industrial surveillance spans the growing population of the planet, the fast-growing mobile market, and the start of the world’s network coverage campaign, Google is becoming synonymous with the word “internet” for more and more people. The company's ability to influence the choice and behavior of a person gives it the power to influence the course of history.
If the future of the Internet is to become Google it is a reason to start worrying for people all over the world: in Latin America, in East and Southeast Asia, in India, in the Middle East, in equatorial Africa, in the countries of the former Soviet Union and even in Europe - for all those for whom the Internet embodies the hope of an alternative to American culture, economics and strategic dominance.
The “empire of good” remains an empire.
More information:
Original excerpt on WikiLeaks
"When Google Met WikiLeaks" in its entirety ($ 10)
The first part of the translation
The second part of the translation
Third part of the translation
Fourth part translation
Fifth part of the translation
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/299652/
All Articles