5 ms·

I'm with abdulla. Sure it's not great that Google want to use more of our data. It's annoying, but unfortunately the internet can't be truly free. Google appear

by glennos 15y ago

I'm with abdulla. Sure it's not great that Google want to use more of our data. It's annoying, but unfortunately the internet can't be truly free. Google appear to give you pretty decent tools to limit how they use your data. Switching off third party cookies is also very easy to do. I've done it in Chrome an have no advertising related cookies listed. rbarooah, I'm not sure where you intend to move your services. Would be interesting for you to list the alternatives you have found.

rbarooah 15y ago
Are you with abdulla because you are personally ok with the trade Google is asking for, or because that you think that anyone who isn't ok with it is overreacting?
- glennos 15y ago
  For free services, I think it's understandable that Google wants to profit from the data they collect. I'd prefer they didn't, but to a point I'm willing to live with it so long as there are ways to opt-out to some degree. Not prepared to give them a blank cheque. For me, migrating from their services doesn't seem warranted given the changes. From what I've seen it's relatively easy to minimise the impact. That said, moving to paid/alternative services, probably a good idea, this just isn't a trigger for me.
rbarooah 15y ago
"Unfortunately the internet can't be truly free". This is true, but there's no reason it has to be paid by selling our attention. I'd rather use money. Google Apps - I'm using local apps - iWork - with dropbox for collaboration. AppEngine - linode, rackspace cloud, & AWS. Picasa - iPhoto + Email Voice - SkypeIn Calendar - iCloud
- mladenkovacevic 15y ago
  "This is true, but there's no reason it has to be paid by selling our attention. I'd rather use money." My attention is a commodity I have great control over. My money has less fluidity and I'd rather get some interest on it. Especially when new products are constantly created and they are sold to me in tiny modules preventing me from estimating how much money I will need throughout my lifetime to cover the cost of all my needs/desires. But here is a fixed currency based model which maybe could work 100 years in the future: Everybody pays a "technology tax" that's a fixed monthly or annual cost (maybe it's attached to your ISP bill). This tax then goes into a fund that tech companies (Apples and Googles of the world) can access and withdraw money out of based on the services they offer. Maybe they'd have to get audited on how many users they have and what type of services they take advantage of, and some independent auditor would try and attach a dollar value to this effort giving the techs the ability to withdraw that amount from the "tax fund".
  - rbarooah 15y ago
    I think this means that the value of services would be determined by a government inspector. As for estimating the amount of money you'll need - services basically can't exist if there aren't enough customers who can afford them. Therefore there is an envelope into which they must fit. This means that you can get a rough idea of how much money you'll need by looking at the income levels of other people.

by glennos 15y ago

rbarooah 15y ago

Are you with abdulla because you are personally ok with the trade Google is asking for, or because that you think that anyone who isn't ok with it is overreacting?

glennos 15y ago
For free services, I think it's understandable that Google wants to profit from the data they collect. I'd prefer they didn't, but to a point I'm willing to live with it so long as there are ways to opt-out to some degree. Not prepared to give them a blank cheque. For me, migrating from their services doesn't seem warranted given the changes. From what I've seen it's relatively easy to minimise the impact. That said, moving to paid/alternative services, probably a good idea, this just isn't a trigger for me.

rbarooah 15y ago

"Unfortunately the internet can't be truly free". This is true, but there's no reason it has to be paid by selling our attention. I'd rather use money. Google Apps - I'm using local apps - iWork - with dropbox for collaboration. AppEngine - linode, rackspace cloud, & AWS. Picasa - iPhoto + Email Voice - SkypeIn Calendar - iCloud

mladenkovacevic 15y ago
"This is true, but there's no reason it has to be paid by selling our attention. I'd rather use money." My attention is a commodity I have great control over. My money has less fluidity and I'd rather get some interest on it. Especially when new products are constantly created and they are sold to me in tiny modules preventing me from estimating how much money I will need throughout my lifetime to cover the cost of all my needs/desires. But here is a fixed currency based model which maybe could work 100 years in the future: Everybody pays a "technology tax" that's a fixed monthly or annual cost (maybe it's attached to your ISP bill). This tax then goes into a fund that tech companies (Apples and Googles of the world) can access and withdraw money out of based on the services they offer. Maybe they'd have to get audited on how many users they have and what type of services they take advantage of, and some independent auditor would try and attach a dollar value to this effort giving the techs the ability to withdraw that amount from the "tax fund".
- rbarooah 15y ago
  I think this means that the value of services would be determined by a government inspector. As for estimating the amount of money you'll need - services basically can't exist if there aren't enough customers who can afford them. Therefore there is an envelope into which they must fit. This means that you can get a rough idea of how much money you'll need by looking at the income levels of other people.