Google Assists In Arrest Of Indian Man 609
An anonymous reader writes "After a Google user posted a profane picture of the Hindu saint Shivaji, Indian authorities contacted Google to ask for his IP address. Google complied. He was arrested and is reported to have been beaten by a lathi and asked to use the same bowl to eat and to use in the toilet.
Not surprisingly, Google is a keen to play this down as Yahoo is being hauled over the coals by US Congress for handing over IP addresses and emails to the Chinese Government which resulted in a Chinese democracy activist being jailed." Readers are noting that these are 2 unrelated cases — the latter is several months old.
One big difference (Score:5, Interesting)
India is a Democracy. China is not.
Re:One big difference (Score:3, Interesting)
Google gave IP address. Police bungled it (Score:5, Interesting)
They got the wrong party and roughly treated the arrested man. The idea is to send the message loud and clear, "we will get the IP address and catch you and mess you up. May this time we messed up the wrong guy, but next time, watch out." That is the logic of the Indian police who think this will reduce such incidents in the future. But what trips them up is that a savvy criminal will know how to hide his tracks, and it will always be the wrong guy who gets nabbed. But it allows the police to pretend they did something. (You might argue defacing Shivaji's picture is not criminal. But given the reaction you typically get from Muslims for defacing images of Mohammad, this reaction by the desis is quite tame. And this is a different argument anyway, nothing concerning Google)
If google had not promised anonymity to Orkut users, then it can't be held accountable. There are bigger villains in the story, the desi police, incompetent desi ISP, desi politics and the desi population in general that accepts this all.
Re:Sloppy Definition? maybe... (Score:2, Interesting)
I dunno, I could think of a few people who I wouldn't have issue hearing were being beaten, jailed, etc. The difference here is that a man was put in that situation - by Google, who of all entities should know the consequences of their actions considering that their core competency is data mining and appropriate ad placement - over an image. Something the majority of google's product/customer base would take issue with and perhaps even consider, "evil". Most westerners (and probably other people too, but I can only speak about what I'm familliar with) believe that in a perfect world there would be nothing you could say that any of us would want you to be placed in an indian-fetish-dungeon over. Google, as an American company, should respect that.
Re:Hypocrites (Score:2, Interesting)
Reason of Arrest (Score:4, Interesting)
Apparently "being obscene" is a crime in India and the IT act takes it to the internet. So posting "obscene" stuff is punishable by an imprisonment of upto 5 years. So the crucial part was "obscene comment" not "targeted to Sonia Gandhi". Of course the person filing the complaint with the police was a member of the Congress Party (whose leader is Mrs. Gandhi).
India has many laws that are rooted in the prude thinking that is pretty much common there. This law is just an example that aims to turn "a behavior that maybe not be noble" into "a criminal act". The same law makes pornography illegal even though you can find pornography pretty easily.
He posted under his (almost) real name (Score:2, Interesting)
under an email address that contains his name
("It was known that the vulgar message about Sonia Gandhi was circulated through an email address â" Rahulvaidindia@gmail.com").
Does someone want to stay anonymous if he
uses such an email address?
Re:Even the Post Title (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Sloppy Definition? maybe... (Score:2, Interesting)
I can think of a lot of evil things Google is doing. Selling advertising would be the major one. But, at the end of the day, if you don't want to be public and open about what you're doing, you shouldn't be doing it, and no one should be helping you conceal it. The act of concealing is an evil act, just like spreading misinformation is also an evil act.
Nice to see they got it right for a change.
Re:Hey uh, our rights aren't everyones rights (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Sloppy Definition? maybe... (Score:3, Interesting)
Say what? Concealing is *absolutely not* an evil act.
For example: when someone with power over you is doing evil, and you act to stop them, and you try to conceal your identity and/or the ways you try to stop them, that is good, not evil. If you broadcast to everyone everything you do, then the people who are evil and powerful will walk all over you.
Concealing may be evil, depending on the circumstances. Misinforming is more likely to be evil, but still depending on the circumstances.
Evil actions are those that hurt people (or, to a lesser extent, other living things).
Re:Wow... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Dont be evil (Score:5, Interesting)
Democracy my ass (Score:1, Interesting)
As the meme goes, this word ('democracy') does not mean what you think it means - in India especially.
Indian democracy means whatever is fine with people 'elected' by the public. They do not really represent the majority for two reasons - First, in India, hardly 50% participate in elections. Second, from the pool of candidates, the best you can do is to choose the one who has committed least murders and rapes. I do not know the exact numbers, but safe guess would be 25% - thats the % of elected members of parliament (senators in the US) who have criminal history - and here, we are just talking about official history - for majority of the crimes from these politician assholes go unpunished and without any history in the police files.
Add that to the religious angle and all you get is mocker of democracy. India is a country living in two era at the same time - one is where IT and space technology keep on producing economical and/or scientific miracles (miracle, because they achieve all this in spite of the government), the other is where majority of people give more attention to gods rather than their neighbors starving to death.
The country is plagued by politicians - the dream of a democratic nation has died since the 60s. Congress started the rot and BJP and others are doing the same with their own agenda.
What is funny is when somebody from from the west cites Indian democracy better than the chinese rules - I appreciate it, but its not true. I am not saying Chinese (or any other govt) is better, but just because India is so called democracy does not make it any better than any other country with autocracy or any other form of government. At least in China, they can create laws and actually implement it - in India, they can hardly create laws, and when they do it, the laws will be used in torturing more and more innocent citizens who do not have any leverage in the system because they do not know anybody influential in the local political clout.
Re:Wow... (Score:2, Interesting)
Vaid was charged under section 292 of Indian Penal Code and section 67 of the Information Technology Act because he created a profile and then posted content in vulgar language about Sonia Gandhi in the community.
Which fantasy figure were you referring to?
Re:Sloppy Definition? maybe... (Score:4, Interesting)
Really? So, say I catch some kid trying to shoplift. Out of the goodness of my heart, I decide not to press charges, and instead just tell his parents. His parents take him home, beat him, lock him in his room for a week, and force him to endure all sorts of humiliating punishments. You're saying what I did was evil?
Re:Do no evil doesnt stop 'aiding evil do bad thin (Score:3, Interesting)
Not everyone lives where you live. You need to follow the laws of the locality you are doing business in, when inside of those localities. It is not google's place to determine what laws are "just" and "unjust".
By your logic, someone from Amsterdam should be allowed to setup a shop next door to you selling illegal drugs (in the US) and it should be OK... because after all, where they live it's legal.
Re:Wow... (Score:3, Interesting)
Put your money where your mouth is: post your name and adress here.
Re:Sloppy Definition? maybe... (Score:3, Interesting)
Hrm.
I've had quite a few jobs in my life, some intellectual, some a bit less so. Three of them in particular taught me a lot about human nature and the relationship between power, benevolence, trust, and performance. The three jobs were:
1. Security guard.
2. Dog trainer.
3. Military Instructor.
In all three cases, the style of leadership or control could lead to vastly different outcomes:
1. If you treat people (or dogs) in a purely benevolent manner, with no thought to their conduct, they will almost invariably turn on you. In a human workplace this means decreased productivity, inappropriate behaviour on the part of employees, and, surprisingly, plummeting morale.
2. If you act like a fascist dictator, imposing punishment without ever rewarding good performance, you will inevitably create an environment where those whom you hold power over will be miserable, and have no desire to achieve anything. You will, in other words, get complete obedience, but no creativity or individual thought whatsoever.
3. The best way to get good performance out of people (or dogs) is to reward good performance, and punish bad performance, but also to do so consistently, without fail. The worst thing you can do is be inconsistent. In the extreme cases, inconsistent punishments and rewards will result in those whom you hold power over acting like paranoid neurotics. It's especially heartbreaking to see this type of behaviour in dogs.
One thing that really surprised me initially, though, is that humans and dogs generally respond identically when faced with these circumstances. It SHOULDN'T be surprising, since we are just another species of animal, but it did surprise me nonetheless.
What I've learned from these experiences is that we as a species crave order - and to have order, we need some level of discipline and control. At some deep level we want to reckognized and rewarded for our accomplishments, and we need to see that those who act contrary to the good of the group are held accountable and suffer as a result of their actions. Our entire concept of justice is based on the idea that "good" actions result in prosperity, while "bad" actions result in destitution. The only difference between societies seems to be in how we define "good" and "bad".
Every species on the planet exhibits systems of reward and punishment, so why should we be any different?
By the way, if you want a more intellectual argument rather than one based on personal experience, do some research on "Games Theory". In particular, "The Prisoner's Dilemma" does an excellent job of explaining exactly why a consistent system of reward and punishment works better than any other system.
But they are. If they weren't, we would grant the same rights to 2 year olds that we do to adults. Likewise, we would not have different ways of pursuing legal charges against minors and adults, and we would most certainly not hold parents accountable for the actions of their children.
Clearly, children ARE the property of their parents - however, they are property over which society (partly through the government, partly through social interaction) also exercises some control. Children do not become free citizens until they reach the age of majority, and claim the same rights as the rest of society.