Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site

Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by colordrops on Saturday July 23, 2016 @11:51AM (#12149813)

The previous accusation was that Google was hacked and unaware that PRISM was collecting data, which is what I was referring to. Please read the thread before commenting.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by MichaelGG on Saturday July 23, 2016 @02:02PM (#12150349)

OK well in that case every person/company in the country "works with" the USG since they comply with some laws/demands.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by colordrops on Saturday July 23, 2016 @02:17PM (#12150416)

Google initially denied that they complied with the usage of PRISM, until documentation showed they were lying. Apple held out longer than Google, so at some point they all had to decide that they were going to "work" with the USG.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by MichaelGG on Saturday July 23, 2016 @04:25PM (#12150880)

Please give me an exact citation. Perhaps update Wikipedia while you're at it?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by colordrops on Saturday July 23, 2016 @05:09PM (#12151013)

I've never edited wikipedia, but my understanding is that it is labor intensive. I'll just provide a citation here:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/19/us-tech-giants...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site by emmelaich on Sunday July 24, 2016 @08:17AM (#12153119)

The words "mandatory" and "compulsory" figure prominently in that article.

[ Parent | on HN ]