3 ms·

Wow, seriously? Google is out to get poor people? Let's not talk about how Google made access to an entire world of information 100x easier and cheaper, so an

Wow, seriously? Google is out to get poor people? Let's not talk about how Google made access to an entire world of information 100x easier and cheaper, so anyone with a cheap tablet or phone can get information you used to need a $1k encyclopedia for. Let's not talk about how Google drove Android, a platform which gave a huge number of people internet access by giving them $100 phones or tablets. Let's not talk about how Google has (done its best) to scan every book ever written to make books available online and free. Google has done vast amounts to level the playing field, making top-tier services like Gmail and Google maps free, where previously people had to pay for Garmin navigation or Outlook or w/e. The kind of argument the OP makes is shallow, petty, and out to use a hammer for every grudge. Yeah, Google makes money via ads. No, that doesn't mean they are racist, sexist, or whatever the hell you feel like making up just to complain about advertising.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
greglindahl 10y ago
Do you find that using words like "shallow" and "petty" to describe arguments that you disagree with fosters good conversation?
- bpodgursky 10y ago
  The top comment was a hit piece, not an attempt at honest conversation. It's whataboutism, to distract from the actual conversation. "Oh, Google is doing a good thing, but what about all the bad things they do" If you feed it, you talk about what they want you to talk about, which is inherently negative about Google in this case. It's a standard tactic of state-sponsored propaganda machines (not that I think it is in this case).
woodruffw 10y ago
I think you should read the OP more charitably. They're not saying that Google is "out to get" poor people - they're saying that Google's advertising practices cause disproportionate harm to the poor. I don't think that Google's executives mean to diminish the welfare of the hardest off, but that they're (possibly willfully) ignorant of the broader consequences of their business model. This collaboration with Howard, as well as the other humanitarian/public services you've mentioned, seem to support the latter.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

greglindahl 10y ago

Do you find that using words like "shallow" and "petty" to describe arguments that you disagree with fosters good conversation?

bpodgursky 10y ago
The top comment was a hit piece, not an attempt at honest conversation. It's whataboutism, to distract from the actual conversation. "Oh, Google is doing a good thing, but what about all the bad things they do" If you feed it, you talk about what they want you to talk about, which is inherently negative about Google in this case. It's a standard tactic of state-sponsored propaganda machines (not that I think it is in this case).

woodruffw 10y ago

I think you should read the OP more charitably. They're not saying that Google is "out to get" poor people - they're saying that Google's advertising practices cause disproportionate harm to the poor. I don't think that Google's executives mean to diminish the welfare of the hardest off, but that they're (possibly willfully) ignorant of the broader consequences of their business model. This collaboration with Howard, as well as the other humanitarian/public services you've mentioned, seem to support the latter.