How Google Ruined the Internet

Status
Not open for further replies.
I will note for the record that this is not what I wrote. It was censored by moderators who apparently disliked what I actually and *accurately* said. Which is both ironic and disturbing.
Your post was reported because of a single term, you had used, not because I especially dislike it, sorry.
If it was meant ironically, this may be an example, that this rhetorical evice can be problematic in a written
conversation, and that straying into politics may cause problems here.
And just to remind to the 75th anniversary of the German constituition, article of statute N° 5 says: Censorship does not take place ! :cool:
 
Last edited:
Your post was reported because of a single term, you had used, not because I especially dislike it,

The term was accurate. There are those for whom the term applies who don't like that it applies, so they want to censor every instance of it applying to them and theirs. Which only makes it that much more applicable.
 
All three were on stage once...Penn's gone PETA

I thought DOGPILE was a better search engine...heard about it from the early days of Kim Kommando

For most of its history Dogpile was sourcing its search results from Google.
 
The term was accurate. There are those for whom the term applies who don't like that it applies, so they want to censor every instance of it applying to them and theirs. Which only makes it that much more applicable.
Branding Conover as a whatever was just a case of shoot-the-messenger.
 
He's a hyperkinetic politically extreme whacko. For a while there during the early days of "Adam Ruins Everything" he was good, but he drifted into far left.

I tried watching the vid you posted, but only got a couple minutes in before the meth-schtick became overwhelming.

I have zero patience with talking heads. Can someone briefly summarize the message ?

Branding Conover as a whatever was just a case of shoot-the-messenger.

Anyway, the central point was that strengthening (or even just enforcing) antitrust laws, would create a free market and force competition leading to companies actually having to deliver services to users as well as advertisers.

So, I suppose that is the extreme left position? To have free markets instead of monopolies?
 
All three were on stage once...Penn's gone PETA

I thought DOGPILE was a better search engine...heard about it from the early days of Kim Kommando
I used to use Dogpile and Web Crawler.
 
Your post was reported because of a single term, you had used, not because I especially dislike it, sorry.
If it was meant ironically, this may be an example, that this rhetorical evice can be problematic in a written
conversation, and that straying into politics may cause problems here.
And just to remind to the 75th anniversary of the German constituition, article of statute N° 5 says: Censorship does not take place ! :cool:
Text can be perilous at times.
 
So, I suppose that is the extreme left position? To have free markets instead of monopolies?

Conovers' whole schtick is "extreme left positions." He would eliminate SpaceX and Blue Origin from the timeline due to his hatred of capitalism, for starters. That alone is enough to earn him eternal ire among rational people.
 
The World Service (perhaps because its staff come from many nations) has managed to remain a decent news provider.
BBC Radio 4 and TV long ago fell victim to the infotainment virus and are ego trips for overpaid presenters.

Gosh. Though I wouldn't use that wording for an academic paper, it is essentially correct. As the previous generation retires, a new, pre-programmed group has come in. I find it sad that the BBC has become infected with the degenerate American approach: sling mud, it's all about money, and make sure the soup has enough scandal, death and killing to suit the tastes of the newly minted corporate overlords.

Give me real, actual, professional journalism any day. Instead, I find myself enlisting the aid of various highly specialized sites and publications and piecing things together on my own.
 
The term was accurate. There are those for whom the term applies who don't like that it applies, so they want to censor every instance of it applying to them and theirs. Which only makes it that much more applicable.

But, but... it can't be censorship. We're living in the 21st Century! We're living in THE FUTURE (TM). Censorship has been... uh... been...

I'm done now.

:)
 
The principle theme of this thread (Google, you remember ?) was mentioned in two posts on this second page here ...
But ok, more in-depth discussions can never be bad, even if the original topic may only be a sideline then...
And Google is part of the economy, economy is always related to politics, so it may have been foreseeable, that
we would drift into politics here, though ... if the theme would have "my best child's birthday", politics wouldn't have
been further away, than here !
Cannot help the feeling, that the problem is, that often enough people cannot, and cannot and cannot refrain from
rubbing their political opinion in others faces !
But perhaps they regard themselves as descendants of Cato the elder ("Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam")
:mad:
 
Cannot help the feeling, that the problem is, that often enough people cannot, and cannot and cannot refrain from
rubbing their political opinion in others faces !

Perhaps if the original posters don't want politics brought up, they shouldn't use politically decisive figureheads.

"Here's a discussion of how to clean dirty isopropyl alcohol from washing 3D prints, brought to you by Che Guevarra."

"Here's how to change a tire on your Volkswagen, as described by an AI simulation of Adolph Hitler."

I'm sure there are better figureheads to describe the problems with Google than the guy who wants to literally murder the cowboy movie character because too many of them are white and who wants to permanently trap humanity on Earth because some people have more money than others.
 
As the original poster - I know nothing about Mr Conover, I came across the video and felt it summarised my issues with Google pretty well.
 
Conovers' whole schtick is "extreme left positions." He would eliminate SpaceX and Blue Origin from the timeline due to his hatred of capitalism, for starters. That alone is enough to earn him eternal ire among rational people.
Pushing the same theme in discussions, no matter the subject under discussion. That's... familiar, actually.
 
an interesting resource to look up your own frequently used news providers.
Will go have a look at it.
Thanks!

some notes:

With my health the mess it is in the way it is, it's been something like 20 years since I've had a television, the thing became instant sensory overload, even before considering what was being said/presented in the content.
The internet is wonderful in that I can find less hyper sources.
Along with that, I just don't have the mental energy to process intensity,
so I'm not on social media other than YouTube and Tumblr, where what I go to can be finely curated.
and
I don't much look at generalized news any more either.

For the aviation, space, railway, shipping, archaeology, health, news I want there are dedicated places for that which likely will not appear on that website.

For instance I am not finding Workboat, Freightwaves, Railway Gazette International, Mass Transit Magazine, Railway Age, Arkeonews, Flight Global, SpaceRef, on that web page.
 
Lets see what the Google founders had to say about advertising and search, back at the start of it all.

8 Appendix A: Advertising and Mixed Motives

Currently, the predominant business model for commercial search engines is advertising. The goals of the advertising business model do not always correspond to providing quality search to users. For example, in our prototype search engine one of the top results for cellular phone is "The Effect of Cellular Phone Use Upon Driver Attention", a study which explains in great detail the distractions and risk associated with conversing on a cell phone while driving. This search result came up first because of its high importance as judged by the PageRank algorithm, an approximation of citation importance on the web [Page, 98]. It is clear that a search engine which was taking money for showing cellular phone ads would have difficulty justifying the page that our system returned to its paying advertisers. For this type of reason and historical experience with other media [Bagdikian 83], we expect that advertising funded search engines will be inherently biased towards the advertisers and away from the needs of the consumers. Since it is very difficult even for experts to evaluate search engines, search engine bias is particularly insidious. A good example was OpenText, which was reported to be selling companies the right to be listed at the top of the search results for particular queries [Marchiori 97]. This type of bias is much more insidious than advertising, because it is not clear who "deserves" to be there, and who is willing to pay money to be listed. This business model resulted in an uproar, and OpenText has ceased to be a viable search engine. But less blatant bias are likely to be tolerated by the market. For example, a search engine could add a small factor to search results from "friendly" companies, and subtract a factor from results from competitors. This type of bias is very difficult to detect but could still have a significant effect on the market. Furthermore, advertising income often provides an incentive to provide poorquality search results. For example, we noticed a major search engine would not return a large airline's homepage when the airline's name was given as a query. It so happened that the airline had placed an expensive ad, linked to the query that was its name. A better search engine would not have required this ad, and possibly resulted in the loss of the revenue from the airline to the search engine. In general, it could be argued from the consumer point of view that the better the search engine is, the fewer advertisements will be needed for the consumer to find what they want. This of course erodes the advertising supported business model of the existing search engines. However, there will always be money from advertisers who want a customer to switch products, or have something that is genuinely new. But we believe the issue of advertising causes enough mixed incentives that it is crucial to have a competitive search engine that is transparent and in the academic realm.


Its amazing what a few billion dollars can do to your moral compass.
 
I would like a few billion dollars. I'll be responsible with it. Honest...
 
Don't worry. In a few years inflation will mean that billion dollar bills will flutter in the wind like so much other trash. You'll be able to pack the holes in your shoes with them.

This is a good opportunity to add my yearly request for a million dollars. But, due to inflation, I am reducing it to a mere $500,000.

So, if any billionaires are reading, just send me a PM...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom