3 ms·
The point is that in Western countries, their entire populations are already heavily invested in those services. Suddenly losing access would be unthinkable.
by rl3 9y ago
The point is that in Western countries, their entire populations are already heavily invested in those services. Suddenly losing access would be unthinkable.
- rgbrenner 9y agoSure.. but dont you think Germans understand that their hate speech laws arent a simple black and white issue? that theyve made a compromise of their values because of their history with nazism and the wars that devastated their country. I think they know full well the compromise they've made. So if google disappeared tomorrow in Germany because of this law.. do you think they pick up their protest signs and start marching? Or do you think they understand it's more complex than that and the answer isn't that simple.. and because they are busy people, they type bing.com into their browser instead. Their history contributes directly toward their motivation to fight for a change in those laws (for the benefit of a foreign company I might add), and their willingness to use inferior alternatives. Given what they believe they are protecting against, I don't think they will bow to pressure easily.. they'll change them when they believe the threat is gone.
- rl3 9y ago>... and because they are busy people, they type bing.com into their browser instead. All major tech companies accompany their services with user accounts that hold a treasure trove of personal information, and that users are likely to be invested in to some degree. Facebook (the subject of the article) happens to be the best example of this, because you can't simply go to some other site and have all your personal connections be present; the lock-in factor is very high there. Moreover, if tech companies coordinated their efforts, simply using the competitor as your example suggests would not work.