4 ms·

How about hating the player and the game? The game is shit, yeah. But so's this anyone who enthusiastically said "yes, I would like to find ways to monetize pe

How about hating the player and the game? The game is shit, yeah. But so's this anyone who enthusiastically said "yes, I would like to find ways to monetize people's desire to talk with each other, and do not care in the least if this involves being paid to spread disinformation, or making ad view money off of pushing people towards insane viewpoints". Yes, this includes Google. This includes Twitter. This includes every damn online service that decides its primary customer is advertisers, not users.

sollewitt 6y ago
And how much exacy are you willing to pay per Google search?
- egypturnash 6y ago
  I started to think about this and now I find myself wondering if “internet search” is one of those things that should be a public good, funded by everyone’s taxes. Like libraries - their mission is pretty much the same as Google’s stated mission “make all the world’s information accessible”. Just take it out of the realm of commerce entirely.
  - beagle3 6y ago
    I don't remember where I saw this idea, but it seems right: If public libraries did not exist in this day and age, and someone floated the idea, they would be laughed at and/or fought in the courts of law and public opinion. "It would cause authors to starve! It's socialist/communist! There is no reason I should fund your perverse taste in books!" etc. It is considered axiomatic in Europe, but in the US even things like public schools and public fire brigades are not controversial to some segments of the population. Internet search should be a public good, as should internet service, and email service , much like public schools and the postal service; but it won't happen any time soon just because it makes sense. I think the reason it will happen in some form, sooner or later, is the fact the US is the de-facto hegemon of the internet by being the jurisdiction of Google, Facebook, Amazon/AWS and Microsoft. The NSA+FBI+CIA are able, by decree through NSLs, to read and rewrite the personal communication of probably 90% of the world population, as well as shape their search results. FB has already shown they can affect mood of population at large (in an experiment they did without consent and of which they were proud at the time!) - and they will surely cooperate with governments if "asked" (In the "speak softly and carry a large gun" sense of asking, but likely even without it). At some point, likely after being burned by this (but possibly before), governments will likely setup a local hegemony if only to deleverage the US. Russia and China already did.
heartbeats 6y ago
That's a thing people want. If you ask most people who have been pushed toward insane viewpoints how they feel about said insane viewpoints, I'm sure 99% of them would say it's great. Who are we to deny the validity of their feelings?

sollewitt 6y ago

And how much exacy are you willing to pay per Google search?

egypturnash 6y ago
I started to think about this and now I find myself wondering if “internet search” is one of those things that should be a public good, funded by everyone’s taxes. Like libraries - their mission is pretty much the same as Google’s stated mission “make all the world’s information accessible”. Just take it out of the realm of commerce entirely.
- beagle3 6y ago
  I don't remember where I saw this idea, but it seems right: If public libraries did not exist in this day and age, and someone floated the idea, they would be laughed at and/or fought in the courts of law and public opinion. "It would cause authors to starve! It's socialist/communist! There is no reason I should fund your perverse taste in books!" etc. It is considered axiomatic in Europe, but in the US even things like public schools and public fire brigades are not controversial to some segments of the population. Internet search should be a public good, as should internet service, and email service , much like public schools and the postal service; but it won't happen any time soon just because it makes sense. I think the reason it will happen in some form, sooner or later, is the fact the US is the de-facto hegemon of the internet by being the jurisdiction of Google, Facebook, Amazon/AWS and Microsoft. The NSA+FBI+CIA are able, by decree through NSLs, to read and rewrite the personal communication of probably 90% of the world population, as well as shape their search results. FB has already shown they can affect mood of population at large (in an experiment they did without consent and of which they were proud at the time!) - and they will surely cooperate with governments if "asked" (In the "speak softly and carry a large gun" sense of asking, but likely even without it). At some point, likely after being burned by this (but possibly before), governments will likely setup a local hegemony if only to deleverage the US. Russia and China already did.

heartbeats 6y ago

That's a thing people want. If you ask most people who have been pushed toward insane viewpoints how they feel about said insane viewpoints, I'm sure 99% of them would say it's great. Who are we to deny the validity of their feelings?