Talk:Google

China hacks google

I couldn't find anything mentioning the Google hacks earlier this year in China. Is it in another page?

"In January, Google said it had been subjected to a "sophisticated cyber attack originating from China" - it said the e-mail accounts of human rights activists were among those hacked." China leadership 'orchestrated Google hacking' http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11920616

The release of secret US embassy cables on Chinese hacking this weekend by WikiLeaks shines fresh light on the issue, first publicised in January with Google’s disclosure that its security had been pierced by hackers seeking company programs and information on dissidents." US fears Beijing still backs hacking http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9a0eabc2-0016-11e0-ad1d-00144feab49a.html

ty

--112.207.201.66 03:59, 15 December 2010

Edit request on 15 February 2012

While I agree there is a deal in the works, it is not accurate to list Motorola Mobility as a subsidiary of Google, and this should be removed from the Company Facts:

PLEASE CHANGE THIS: |subsid = AdMob, DoubleClick, Motorola Mobility, On2 Technologies, Picnik, Zagat, YouTube

TO THIS: |subsid = AdMob, DoubleClick, On2 Technologies, Picnik, Zagat, YouTube

Bobsd (talk) 07:44, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

 Not done: You will become autoconfirmed after one more edit and can make the change yourself. Please be careful to have verifiable reliable sources to support any first-hand knowledge. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 15:31, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I made the edit. Once the acquisition goes through, I will add MMI back with the proper references. Bobsd (talk) 04:31, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Does Google think that government is trustworthy and that Google is un-hackable

The article on Google should include a bigger section on privacy. Of course, it must be un-biased. Anthony717 (talk) 02:28, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Changes in its privact law

It has been in the news recently that Google has changed its privacy law, and that this has been controversial, as it could go against regulations of the European Union. This could go in the article, if any one knows the full details here. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 16:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Deadlinks, etc

Just ran WP:Checklinks on this article and founds a number of errors and various other issues with some of the citations: result Jesse V. (talk) 23:02, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

KGB

Google is owned by the KGB but this is not mentioned in the article. They secretly work for the Mau Maus of Kenya bootlegging proprietary products. All revenues made by Google shall be forfeited by decree. The penalty for an official stealing money from a civilian is death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.186.208.214 (talk) 20:30, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Headquarters

The info box says that Google's headquarters is the U.S. This is not true - Google International Headquarters is in Dublin, Ireland. "Google's international headquarters is in Dublin, Ireland, taking advantage of the country's small corporation tax." Google is a transnational corporate entity - the headquarters field in the info box should reflect the international headquarters. Barry McGuiness (talk) 12:12, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Google's corporate headquarters are at the Googleplex in Mountain View, California. The incorporation of the company is also in the United States, under Delaware General Corporation Law.[1] Google has various overseas offices [2] but is a US based company.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 13:02, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Googol

• {{distinguish}}

I don't think the use of this template is suitable for the article. The word "Google" and "Googol" are well-known and quite distinguishable. And I don't expect our readers to be dumb enough to confuse between the two. The fact that Googol is a "namesake" or "homonym" – [3] – is already being referred to in the article, so don't see any point in mentioning that over the top. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 05:40, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Googol also has a disambiguation, although nowadays the Internet company is far more famous than the number 10¹⁰⁰. The disambig here could probably be removed.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 09:10, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Philantropy section inaccuracy

"Google revealed the winners of the project, giving a total of ten million dollars to various ideas ranging from non-profit organizations that promote education to a website that intends to make all legal documents public and online."

References: http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2010/09/10-million-for-project-10100-winners.html

None of the 5 mentioned initiatives "intend to make all legal documents public and online" from the description given in the reference link. It sounds like their talking about something similar to Project Gutenberg who Google did have talks with before going off and starting their own (and in many ways more limited) Google Books

TLDR: The summation of projects that received money from the Google.org Project 10^100 needs revising to be accurate.

132.185.240.124 (talk) 14:16, 22 April 2012 (UTC)