<story><title>Google, Just Cut The BS And Give The Gordon Gekko Speech Already</title><url>http://techcrunch.com/2010/08/13/google-net-neutrality/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>moultano</author><text>Can someone explain to me how they think less than full net-neutrality benefits Google? I didn&apos;t understand that argument in this article, or any of the previous ones.</text></comment>
<story><title>Google, Just Cut The BS And Give The Gordon Gekko Speech Already</title><url>http://techcrunch.com/2010/08/13/google-net-neutrality/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>bryanh</author><text>It was about time someone said something to this effect. Net neutrality aside, Google is a public company. They have shareholders. From what it sounds like, Larry and Sergey are more or less full blown academics and therefore idealistic. Problem is, they aren&apos;t the parents of a Stanford project anymore but instead a multi-billion, multi-national corporation with thousands of shareholders, employees and customers.&lt;p&gt;Could they have approached net-neutrality with a &quot;cut off your nose to spite your face&quot; approach? Absolutely. Could they have won out in the face of adversity? Maybe. Would it have been good business? Most assuredly not.&lt;p&gt;Google in acting in self-preservation; nothing more, nothing less. They aren&apos;t martyrs. I can understand if you are upset about them not admitting this fact, but anything else is naive.</text></comment>