Sigh. Its easy to despair about the "new world economics" that we're so blithely moving into and writing on as thought leaders and practicing as innovators and providing hard advice about as....advisors. Why, because you truly wonder about the people who are leading this Live Web/Web 2.0/Social Networking/New Customer/Business Web evolution/revolution. I ran across an interview with Sergei Brin, one of the guys that I found to be (I thought) a truly revolutionary disrupter. Watching Google go after Microsoft has been fascinating. Google just a couple of days ago announced their online spreadsheet, which, I hear from informed individuals, is just a half-completed version of a mini-Excel.
Regardless of the quality of any one Google online application, the war of the world of omnipresent platforms in this millennium is in full swing between Google and Microsoft (among others). For me, its a source of continuous amazement and occasional delight to see what usurper and pretender to the throne Google is doing to encroach on Microsoft and how Microsoft responds - often very well, sometimes not so well..
But it turns out that Brin might be confusing "omnipresent platform" with "omniscient deity."
The Brin interview, written by AP reporter Ted Bridis, which I found through Silicon Valley.com, quotes Brin making the following totally incredible statements::
We felt that perhaps we could compromise our principles but provide ultimately more information for the Chinese and be a more effective service and perhaps make more of a difference...AND..."Perhaps now the principled approach makes more sense"...AND..."It's perfectly reasonable to do something different, to say, 'Look, we're going to stand by the principle against censorship and we won't actually operate there.' That's an alternate path," Brin said. "It's not where we chose to go right now, but I can sort of see how people came to different conclusions about doing the right thing."
I am utterly flabbergated. Perhaps the principled "approach" now "makes more sense"? I'm nearly speechless, which, for a New Yorker to make that admission, is nearly unthinkable.
But I did say "nearly speechless."
The Translation According to PGreenblog
I think what I'm hearing is something like:"Principles are good, if the lack of them doesn't work. In fact, principles might even be good for business sometimes, though they seem to be extremely inconvenient. I mean, who wants to have principles if we can provide better services without them? They probably cost a lot of money and will reduce search times by several nanoseconds. That's not good for Google. Nossir, it sure isn't."
Look, I'm not trying to be some tower of virtue but sometimes I'm simply amazed at what can emerge from the canyons of the throat of someone who is supposedly leading us to the light of the Neo-Web.
As Christopher Walken said as the gigolo at the Hotel Continental on Saturday Night Live: "Wow. Wowee. Wow. Wow. Wow"
Recent Comments