3 ms·

I think that you are too naive and part of the problem why the Google has become so dominant. I actually installed an ad-blocker because I could not stand vide

I think that you are too naive and part of the problem why the Google has become so dominant. I actually installed an ad-blocker because I could not stand video ads (I would call it TV-cation of the Internet) and that was the easiest way to eliminate them. You argue that people can install another browser and use an ad-blocker with that. This is true for now (given reasonably motivated and knowledgeable users), but Google is also pushing DRM into web browsers. This opens a possibility to restrict access to a website to all browsers but Google one. Given their market dominance they can do this.

anth1988 9y ago
I'm not disagreeing that this is possible, but I don't think jumping straight to such a nightmare scenario really does any good. The reason being is that they just don't go that far and it's suddenly seems okay in comparison to what "could" happen. More realistically, I think Google hurts other ad blockers and expands their oligarchic position in the ads space (especially on mobile).
- AlexandrB 9y ago
  > I'm not disagreeing that this is possible, but I don't think jumping straight to such a nightmare scenario really does any good. Ten years ago I thought that the level of tracking and corporate surveillance we see today was a nightmare scenario. I was clearly an optimist. Don't be me.
  - eveningcoffee 9y ago
    I think that the point of GP is that we did not get here suddenly but step by step.
- eveningcoffee 9y ago
  >I don't think jumping straight to such a nightmare scenario really does any good. I think that is the main problem of the mainstream thinking - inability to see how multiple independent trends can interact and create new realities. I believe that blindness, even the forced one, to such realities is one of the greatest dangers that allows these realities to develop and take almost everyone by surprise - oh, we did not see it coming. >The reason being is that they just don't go that far and it's suddenly seems okay in comparison to what "could" happen. Perhaps two scenarios should be presented: a catastrophic one and a one single step in the wrong direction.

anth1988 9y ago

I'm not disagreeing that this is possible, but I don't think jumping straight to such a nightmare scenario really does any good. The reason being is that they just don't go that far and it's suddenly seems okay in comparison to what "could" happen. More realistically, I think Google hurts other ad blockers and expands their oligarchic position in the ads space (especially on mobile).

AlexandrB 9y ago
> I'm not disagreeing that this is possible, but I don't think jumping straight to such a nightmare scenario really does any good. Ten years ago I thought that the level of tracking and corporate surveillance we see today was a nightmare scenario. I was clearly an optimist. Don't be me.
- eveningcoffee 9y ago
  I think that the point of GP is that we did not get here suddenly but step by step.
eveningcoffee 9y ago
>I don't think jumping straight to such a nightmare scenario really does any good. I think that is the main problem of the mainstream thinking - inability to see how multiple independent trends can interact and create new realities. I believe that blindness, even the forced one, to such realities is one of the greatest dangers that allows these realities to develop and take almost everyone by surprise - oh, we did not see it coming. >The reason being is that they just don't go that far and it's suddenly seems okay in comparison to what "could" happen. Perhaps two scenarios should be presented: a catastrophic one and a one single step in the wrong direction.