To the Editor:

 Uncategorized
Feb 232006
 
Authors:

I would like to comment on the article title 'Child molestation + communism = google, published Tuesday.

I felt this article was very incomplete in the data it presented. It made MSN and Yahoo sound like the good guys when they too have censored their data to the Chinese public.

In fact, MSN was the very first search engine to censor their results for the Chinese. Also, the author did not give any reasoning as to why Google decided to make such a decision. What is better, censored search results, or no Google with no results.

That was their choice, and since they cannot change the entire Chinese government, they had to pick the lesser of the two evils.

 

As for Google not releasing their search data, I find this is a good move. It shows that Google is not going to do the dirty work for the government on the data they should be collecting on their own.

Honestly, I think the biggest thing to criticize Google on is the fact they are storing all this data. They should not be storing a massive search database that contains enough data to connect any one of your searches to you. As long as google is storing this info, the feds and others will be after it. But next time they may not want anonymous data, they may want a list of people they can prosecute.

I think this article was written very poorly. It shows the author truly does not understand what is going on, and is merely trying to show as biased a view as possible. I was disappointed he did not include that MSN is also censoring their results since they have been doing it the longest. I am also disappointed he did not criticize any engine for storing this private user data. To me, the lack of this info shows he was not critically thinking about the issue at hand and was merely regurgitating what he read/saw in the news.

Mike Jensen

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

To the Editor:

 Uncategorized  Add comments
Feb 232006
 
Authors:

This letter is in response to the reply posted by Robert Steele about gay marriage and being a "gay Christian." At first I would just like to ask how is it possible to be a so-called "gay Christian?" If that is possible then find me a "Nazi Jew." I'm not comparing the severity of both things, I'm just talking about how ridiculous the two things sound. I'm not questioning whether Mr. Steele believes in God, I'm just questioning his reason behind making a mockery of the beliefs of millions of people. I refuse to sit by and let some man say such blasphemous things and confuse other people into believing his lies. I'm not condemning, I'm just saying. I will not sit here and quote verse after verse because Mr. Steele has read the Bible – he knows. God loves us all, that is true, but that does not make homosexuality right. It is NOT natural, it is a sin, and there is God's forgiveness for that. The fact that you compare the inability of sterile and infertile people to have babies to being as wrong as homosexuality is ludicrous. Being sterile is natural occurring, being gay is a choice. I'm not spreading a hate message at all; I come at you with love. I just ask that you do not insist on believing that your logic is true, and if you keep on thinking you're a "gay Christian," then find me a "Cat Dog" and I'll believe you.

Robert Avila

sophomore

open option

 Posted by at 5:00 pm