5 ms·

Its because the root motivation most people including myself see is that its about control. And things that try and control other things are evil. Years ago Go

by rjd 15y ago

Its because the root motivation most people including myself see is that its about control. And things that try and control other things are evil. Years ago Google was a disruption force towards existing controlling organisations. Now Google are trying to prevent disruptive technologies eroding their market share. Hence they have joined the ranks of the old guard such as Microsoft, IBM, Apple etc... those desiring control, and hence arguably evil. Just the nature of business, they don't really have a choice, and many respects are bound by law to become 'evil'.

Permit 15y ago
You don't think it cheapens the world 'evil' to be using it like that? I don't think control constitutes "profound immorality and wickedness" to be honest.
- dredmorbius 15y ago
  Barron Acton (John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton) got this right a long time ago: all power tends to corrupt, absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely. There's a modern corrolary: data corrupts, absolute data corrupts absolutely. Google are well and truly headed down this path, it seems.
- rjd 15y ago
  Well I haven't seen them sacrificing children to Baphomet or anything, but I do believe they are ethical and morally in the wrong camp and have been for a few years now. They take money from one industry and use it to crush/undermine competitors in other industries. Hence making a situation where no one can compete with them. IMO abusing market position i.e. they use advertising money to drive technology business out of business They have also perpetuated a belief that you shouldn't pay for anything on the internet. You know that would be fine if we lived in some Marxist utopia, but we don't. Things are expensive to make and produce and Google is making it harder and harder on a daily basis to get returns off products. They did what was needed, improved the world, but those days are gone.
  - jahmed 15y ago
    Well sure they make it harder for some to "get returns off products" but its not a bad thing. Google returns that value to users. Like Google Docs, its sucking the margins out of word processing like Microsoft Office and returning that consumer surplus back to consumers. Google making things free to use isn't bad for users its bad for competitors. No one owes you the ability to extract consumer surplus.
    - rjd 15y ago
      The point is that Google pushing margins so low that returns are below production costs. And the way they manage to do that is by transferring funds to cover that loss. No one can compete with that unless they have a secondary market to channel funds as well. You may be able to get some customers with higher quality goods, but generally people go for the cheapest option. So its good for customers, up until competition and innovation dry up. Which is the normal out come of this situation (and then prices start to climb). The clincher in the whole evil'ness about this is Google has set it up so the only way to compete with them is to buy ads off them. Total abuse of there monopoly IMO.
      - jahmed 15y ago
        Yeah I agree, the rough approximation is Wal-Mart selling loss leaders to drive other higher margin sales. In the case of Google, we see they "sell" Google Docs for free to create network effects (and to erode the lock in of Office) and to cross promote other Google products. This is controversial but is hardly new in any industry. Yes I agree that after a company gains market power there is an incentive to raise prices but I dont think there are many (any?) examples of Google switching a free product to a paid one. You missed the point, Google isn't evil. Yes they make it difficult to compete but thats what successful companies do. The difference is Google does it by making simple disruptive products and prices them at their marginal cost. Google isn't a monopoly by any definition. Google isnt the single seller in any of their markets, Google doesnt compete in a market with high barriers to entry and Google isnt a price maker. Users (advertisers and internet service consumers) can easily switch to competing products and avoid Google entirely. Google is powerful yes, but they create value by helping their users keep their money. Google has never made any promise to anyone else other than their users.
- ddw 15y ago
  > You don't think it cheapens the world 'evil' to be using it like that? Google has used the world "evil" a lot, internally and externally, for years. Of course it isn't demonic or something, but it at least used to have meaning to that company in that they would never do things that they considered "evil" by their own standards. I don't think forcing real names only is "evil," but it can lead towards some evil things. Who has access to our information and communications is going to be a looming issue for a while. It was probably silly for us to think Google would act differently.

by rjd 15y ago

Permit 15y ago

You don't think it cheapens the world 'evil' to be using it like that? I don't think control constitutes "profound immorality and wickedness" to be honest.

dredmorbius 15y ago
Barron Acton (John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton) got this right a long time ago: all power tends to corrupt, absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely. There's a modern corrolary: data corrupts, absolute data corrupts absolutely. Google are well and truly headed down this path, it seems.
rjd 15y ago
Well I haven't seen them sacrificing children to Baphomet or anything, but I do believe they are ethical and morally in the wrong camp and have been for a few years now. They take money from one industry and use it to crush/undermine competitors in other industries. Hence making a situation where no one can compete with them. IMO abusing market position i.e. they use advertising money to drive technology business out of business They have also perpetuated a belief that you shouldn't pay for anything on the internet. You know that would be fine if we lived in some Marxist utopia, but we don't. Things are expensive to make and produce and Google is making it harder and harder on a daily basis to get returns off products. They did what was needed, improved the world, but those days are gone.
- jahmed 15y ago
  Well sure they make it harder for some to "get returns off products" but its not a bad thing. Google returns that value to users. Like Google Docs, its sucking the margins out of word processing like Microsoft Office and returning that consumer surplus back to consumers. Google making things free to use isn't bad for users its bad for competitors. No one owes you the ability to extract consumer surplus.
  - rjd 15y ago
    The point is that Google pushing margins so low that returns are below production costs. And the way they manage to do that is by transferring funds to cover that loss. No one can compete with that unless they have a secondary market to channel funds as well. You may be able to get some customers with higher quality goods, but generally people go for the cheapest option. So its good for customers, up until competition and innovation dry up. Which is the normal out come of this situation (and then prices start to climb). The clincher in the whole evil'ness about this is Google has set it up so the only way to compete with them is to buy ads off them. Total abuse of there monopoly IMO.
    - jahmed 15y ago
      Yeah I agree, the rough approximation is Wal-Mart selling loss leaders to drive other higher margin sales. In the case of Google, we see they "sell" Google Docs for free to create network effects (and to erode the lock in of Office) and to cross promote other Google products. This is controversial but is hardly new in any industry. Yes I agree that after a company gains market power there is an incentive to raise prices but I dont think there are many (any?) examples of Google switching a free product to a paid one. You missed the point, Google isn't evil. Yes they make it difficult to compete but thats what successful companies do. The difference is Google does it by making simple disruptive products and prices them at their marginal cost. Google isn't a monopoly by any definition. Google isnt the single seller in any of their markets, Google doesnt compete in a market with high barriers to entry and Google isnt a price maker. Users (advertisers and internet service consumers) can easily switch to competing products and avoid Google entirely. Google is powerful yes, but they create value by helping their users keep their money. Google has never made any promise to anyone else other than their users.
ddw 15y ago
> You don't think it cheapens the world 'evil' to be using it like that? Google has used the world "evil" a lot, internally and externally, for years. Of course it isn't demonic or something, but it at least used to have meaning to that company in that they would never do things that they considered "evil" by their own standards. I don't think forcing real names only is "evil," but it can lead towards some evil things. Who has access to our information and communications is going to be a looming issue for a while. It was probably silly for us to think Google would act differently.