4 ms·

As someone from Australia. I'm okay with this. Let's be real Web search isn't that new or special anymore. Before you cry that Google has the best results, th

by tamrix 6y ago

As someone from Australia. I'm okay with this. Let's be real Web search isn't that new or special anymore. Before you cry that Google has the best results, the results are actually fed by data mining users. If we all jumped onto Bing tomorrow, after enough usage, it will have the same results as Google. Amp and Chrome dominating the market is reason enough to ditch Google before it continues to abuse its monopoly like this.

Mayzie 6y ago
As someone else from Australia, I am not, not is anyone else I have spoken to. Yea, Google needs to be reigned in, but not like this, not with corrupt legislation handing free money to old established news organisations in an attempt to keep them afloat. You do realise other search engines will likely have to comply (or leave the country) too, right?
denismi 6y ago
If the proposal was to treat Amp, or excessive embedding of content on social media feeds etc., as effectively piracy and prosecuting on that basis then I'd be open to it. But I just can't get behind what is being proposed in any way because it is so absurd and arbitrary. As a supporter of a free and open Internet, I can't see how the logical conclusion of requiring websites to reimburse the other end of a hyperlink for the privilege of linking to them could possibly be a good thing. As a user of the Internet in Australia, I am concerned about what the obvious sovereign risk of the Treasurer having this power to arbitrarily punish web companies does to the availibility of services to Australian users. As a software developer in Australia (albeit one who hasn't worked directly in web tech to date), I am concerned about the damage this does to the tech industry, and subsequently my employability and income, in this country. And most of all as a political citizen of Australia, I am deeply troubled by the idea of giving politicians the power of deciding which media organisations do/don't have the power to arbitrarily extort money out of FAANG as a significant revenue stream.

by tamrix 6y ago

Mayzie 6y ago

As someone else from Australia, I am not, not is anyone else I have spoken to. Yea, Google needs to be reigned in, but not like this, not with corrupt legislation handing free money to old established news organisations in an attempt to keep them afloat. You do realise other search engines will likely have to comply (or leave the country) too, right?

denismi 6y ago

If the proposal was to treat Amp, or excessive embedding of content on social media feeds etc., as effectively piracy and prosecuting on that basis then I'd be open to it. But I just can't get behind what is being proposed in any way because it is so absurd and arbitrary. As a supporter of a free and open Internet, I can't see how the logical conclusion of requiring websites to reimburse the other end of a hyperlink for the privilege of linking to them could possibly be a good thing. As a user of the Internet in Australia, I am concerned about what the obvious sovereign risk of the Treasurer having this power to arbitrarily punish web companies does to the availibility of services to Australian users. As a software developer in Australia (albeit one who hasn't worked directly in web tech to date), I am concerned about the damage this does to the tech industry, and subsequently my employability and income, in this country. And most of all as a political citizen of Australia, I am deeply troubled by the idea of giving politicians the power of deciding which media organisations do/don't have the power to arbitrarily extort money out of FAANG as a significant revenue stream.