5 ms·

That is very black and white thinking. Large organizations can do both good and terrible things. Google still serves are huge portion of search traffic which

That is very black and white thinking. Large organizations can do both good and terrible things. Google still serves are huge portion of search traffic which pretty clearly is a good thing. Youtube has an incredible wealth of tutorials & educational content. Deepmind is pushing the boundaries of what is possible. Various OSS projects continue to be pushed out. Gmail has been an amazing free resource for millions etc. They are also doing terrible things as well.

scrollaway 5y ago
Yeah, google does awful shit every day but it's worth remembering that Maps, Search and YouTube are world-changing resources. All three have their problems (especially that third one) but they have done an incredible amount of Good in the world and they continue to do so every day.
- Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
  The world changing resource is OpenStreetMap. Google Maps is just an asset to better track users. As for YouTube, it is technically marvellous, but since they started censoring and silencing one side of a political spectrum, YT turned into a propaganda machine, no less.
  - scrollaway 5y ago
    I love OSM but without Google Maps it would not exist. It’s just not all black and white.
    - Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
      Actually, OSM was launched before Google Maps, in August 2004, while Google Maps were launched only in February 2005, six months later.
      - scrollaway 5y ago
        I enjoyed your pedantry :) that’s fair enough, but I maintain that without Maps it would not exist in its current state as a reliable alternative to it. Just like I maintain that without Google Search we would not have Bing.
        QuizzicalCarbon 5y ago
        Now you’ve got me missing AltaVista.
        denton-scratch 5y ago
        Hardly pedantry - scrollaway's observation is that OSM cannot have been a response to Maps, because OSM launched before Maps. GP said: "without Google Maps it would not exist." It's not pedantry to note that's the opposite of the truth.
        scrollaway 5y ago
        It would not exist "as you know it today", which is a valid version of "it would not exist". Like i said, i appreciated the comment, it was pedant for a very valid reason. Yours, less so.
        pygy_ 5y ago
        Neither are being pedantic. There's a pretty large difference (a complete categorical one, actually), between not existing and having been influenced. Your dismissive tone all around is pretty jarring too. You were factually, categorically wrong (twice now). That happens. You may want to accept it gracefully it and go on with your day.
        scrollaway 5y ago
        If "that's fair enough" is dismissive to you, I hope I never end up having to break up with you! You're not the person I was replying to, I don't have to justify myself to you. If you want me to be graceful, you can come watch me at the rink instead.
  - quixoticelixer- 5y ago
    What side of the political spectrum did they silence?
hundchenkatze 5y ago
> Google still serves are huge portion of search traffic which pretty clearly is a good thing. Hard disagree there, a single company dominating search is not a good thing.
- scrollaway 5y ago
  Some of us remember Lycos and AltaVista, you know. The alternative isn't necessarily "there's five competing high quality google search competitors".
  - ocdtrekkie 5y ago
    I think the web felt a lot larger and more reachable in the Lycos and AltaVista days, I'd be happy to go back there over the nightmare we have now.
    - scrollaway 5y ago
      You're wearing so many layers of rose-tinted glasses that you're probably Redshift-compatible. There were some nice unique things back then. It also sucked a lot. By the standards of back then we're living in pretty much a utopia. We have devices that Star Trek barely thought of. Seriously, I have a tablet that can speak to almost anyone anywhere in the world, instantaneously, translate into any language (imperfectly), look up any information, access to an encyclopedia tens of thousands of times larger than the most complete ones of just two decades ago, the ability to find free videos teaching me how to do anything, and that's all just the tip of the iceberg. If I were to talk to someone in 2000 and list the shit we can do in just twenty years there is zero chance they would believe me. And it's not like the internet didn't exist back then. I was on it, as were many others on HN. Those who remember, remember that it mostly sucked. What we have today sucks in different ways. But it's also accessible to billions of people, which is billions more than back then. That "nightmare" you're talking about is fixable, and it's certainly not fixable by "going back" to anything. You know there were also ads back then and they were just as awful as today, right? There were just less places where they could end up.

scrollaway 5y ago

Yeah, google does awful shit every day but it's worth remembering that Maps, Search and YouTube are world-changing resources. All three have their problems (especially that third one) but they have done an incredible amount of Good in the world and they continue to do so every day.

Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
The world changing resource is OpenStreetMap. Google Maps is just an asset to better track users. As for YouTube, it is technically marvellous, but since they started censoring and silencing one side of a political spectrum, YT turned into a propaganda machine, no less.
- scrollaway 5y ago
  I love OSM but without Google Maps it would not exist. It’s just not all black and white.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
    Actually, OSM was launched before Google Maps, in August 2004, while Google Maps were launched only in February 2005, six months later.
    - scrollaway 5y ago
      I enjoyed your pedantry :) that’s fair enough, but I maintain that without Maps it would not exist in its current state as a reliable alternative to it. Just like I maintain that without Google Search we would not have Bing.
      - QuizzicalCarbon 5y ago
        Now you’ve got me missing AltaVista.
      - denton-scratch 5y ago
        Hardly pedantry - scrollaway's observation is that OSM cannot have been a response to Maps, because OSM launched before Maps. GP said: "without Google Maps it would not exist." It's not pedantry to note that's the opposite of the truth.
        scrollaway 5y ago
        It would not exist "as you know it today", which is a valid version of "it would not exist". Like i said, i appreciated the comment, it was pedant for a very valid reason. Yours, less so.
        pygy_ 5y ago
        Neither are being pedantic. There's a pretty large difference (a complete categorical one, actually), between not existing and having been influenced. Your dismissive tone all around is pretty jarring too. You were factually, categorically wrong (twice now). That happens. You may want to accept it gracefully it and go on with your day.
        scrollaway 5y ago
        If "that's fair enough" is dismissive to you, I hope I never end up having to break up with you! You're not the person I was replying to, I don't have to justify myself to you. If you want me to be graceful, you can come watch me at the rink instead.
- quixoticelixer- 5y ago
  What side of the political spectrum did they silence?

hundchenkatze 5y ago

> Google still serves are huge portion of search traffic which pretty clearly is a good thing. Hard disagree there, a single company dominating search is not a good thing.

scrollaway 5y ago
Some of us remember Lycos and AltaVista, you know. The alternative isn't necessarily "there's five competing high quality google search competitors".
- ocdtrekkie 5y ago
  I think the web felt a lot larger and more reachable in the Lycos and AltaVista days, I'd be happy to go back there over the nightmare we have now.
  - scrollaway 5y ago
    You're wearing so many layers of rose-tinted glasses that you're probably Redshift-compatible. There were some nice unique things back then. It also sucked a lot. By the standards of back then we're living in pretty much a utopia. We have devices that Star Trek barely thought of. Seriously, I have a tablet that can speak to almost anyone anywhere in the world, instantaneously, translate into any language (imperfectly), look up any information, access to an encyclopedia tens of thousands of times larger than the most complete ones of just two decades ago, the ability to find free videos teaching me how to do anything, and that's all just the tip of the iceberg. If I were to talk to someone in 2000 and list the shit we can do in just twenty years there is zero chance they would believe me. And it's not like the internet didn't exist back then. I was on it, as were many others on HN. Those who remember, remember that it mostly sucked. What we have today sucks in different ways. But it's also accessible to billions of people, which is billions more than back then. That "nightmare" you're talking about is fixable, and it's certainly not fixable by "going back" to anything. You know there were also ads back then and they were just as awful as today, right? There were just less places where they could end up.