The impression I got from the interview is that Eric Schidt feels there is some common ground between what Google does and what Wikileaks does. Some of his reactions seem like "that's the missing idea we needed".
That may also relate to the book they were working on, now called the "The New Digital Age" and to be released in 3 days apparently ( http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Digital-Age-Reshaping/dp/03079... ) - this interview is great marketing for the book then.
My impression was that Eric tried (successfully), to keep Google completely out of the picture, while only talking about issues from a personal perspective. A lot of the technical challenges JA mentioned would arguably be trivial for Google to solve, or attempt to solve (creating a name-hash network tree architecture like the one JA mentioned he'd liked to have seen become popular).
The problem I think is two-fold: 1. Google aligning with Wikileaks/JA will be seen as a political landmine for Google, since Wikileaks' agenda is very much at odds with many governments. This would obviously be something Google will have little interest in pursuing.
2. It's not in Google's best interest to propagate anonymity (as of now). Google's core revenue model derives from its ability to track people on the Internet. Making it easier for them to don anonymity will undermine and possibly destroy this model.
Whether Google's/Eric Schmidt's ultimate goals are good or evil is anybody's guess, and I don't think I gained any new insights into it based on this interview. It does appear that Eric/Google do have an interest in seeing freer access to information, as evidenced by them pushing for faster Internet, more secure/private browsing (https, 2-factor authentication, fighting official requests for access to user accounts [2]), access to the Internet in North Korea, etc. The more people are on the Internet, and the more they browse, the greater Google's revenues.
Google's upper management have also allegedly (and secretly) played a part in the Arab springs, which I would hazard a guess was a altruistic move, rather than a purely political one, but that's speculation [1].
Oh, and BTW, the timing of this 'leak' a few days before Eric Schmidt's book is highly suspect, no? :)
After reading the interview, I have zero interest in reading any book from Eric Schmidt, but I am thoroughly fascinated by what Assange has to say. This interview is probably going to be much more insightful than any book Schmidt will write.
Comments
The impression I got from the interview is that Eric Schidt feels there is some common ground between what Google does and what Wikileaks does. Some of his reactions seem like "that's the missing idea we needed".
That may also relate to the book they were working on, now called the "The New Digital Age" and to be released in 3 days apparently ( http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Digital-Age-Reshaping/dp/03079... ) - this interview is great marketing for the book then.
The Draw Shop has a nice summary of what's in the book - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39tvjOATrCA
My impression was that Eric tried (successfully), to keep Google completely out of the picture, while only talking about issues from a personal perspective. A lot of the technical challenges JA mentioned would arguably be trivial for Google to solve, or attempt to solve (creating a name-hash network tree architecture like the one JA mentioned he'd liked to have seen become popular).
The problem I think is two-fold: 1. Google aligning with Wikileaks/JA will be seen as a political landmine for Google, since Wikileaks' agenda is very much at odds with many governments. This would obviously be something Google will have little interest in pursuing.
2. It's not in Google's best interest to propagate anonymity (as of now). Google's core revenue model derives from its ability to track people on the Internet. Making it easier for them to don anonymity will undermine and possibly destroy this model.
Whether Google's/Eric Schmidt's ultimate goals are good or evil is anybody's guess, and I don't think I gained any new insights into it based on this interview. It does appear that Eric/Google do have an interest in seeing freer access to information, as evidenced by them pushing for faster Internet, more secure/private browsing (https, 2-factor authentication, fighting official requests for access to user accounts [2]), access to the Internet in North Korea, etc. The more people are on the Internet, and the more they browse, the greater Google's revenues.
Google's upper management have also allegedly (and secretly) played a part in the Arab springs, which I would hazard a guess was a altruistic move, rather than a purely political one, but that's speculation [1].
Oh, and BTW, the timing of this 'leak' a few days before Eric Schmidt's book is highly suspect, no? :)
[1]: http://thepassionateattachment.com/2012/03/23/stratforleaks-... (sorry this is not the best source, but Googling around will get you the actual Wikileaks cables and analysis)
[2]: http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2259557/google-figh...
Edit: formatting
After reading the interview, I have zero interest in reading any book from Eric Schmidt, but I am thoroughly fascinated by what Assange has to say. This interview is probably going to be much more insightful than any book Schmidt will write.