Jump to content

Google "Do No Evil" meta thread


bernorange

Recommended Posts

I ranted a bit about Google on TOS but neglected to start a new thread here when we migrated.  I searched and didn't see an existing thread for the purpose so here we are.

Quote

...

AMP allows Google to basically take over hosting the web as well. The Google AMP Cache will serve AMP pages instead of a website’s own hosting environment, and also allow Google to perform their own optimisations to further enhance user experience.

As a side benefit, it also allows Google full control over content monetisation. No more rogue ad networks, no more malicious ads, all monetisation approved and regulated by Google. If anything happens that falls outside of the AMP standard’s restrictions, the page in question simply becomes AMP-invalid and is ejected from the AMP cache – and subsequently from Google’s results. At that point the page might as well not exist any more.

...

More:  https://www.polemicdigital.com/google-amp-go-to-hell/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Parliament - you could click the link for the full explanation, but essentially, Google is using their position as the de facto monopoly on search traffic to force news sites (all sites really, but news sites specifically at this time) to use a (mobile) content delivery format that they (Google) control.  You don't use Google's format, they don't send you any traffic.  Google's format allows Google to do anything they want to your content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 9/11/2018 at 9:23 AM, Doc Holliday said:

I suspect there will be a global economic collapse at some point, when?, who knows, and the alphabet, plus a few other major corporations, will be able to offer a solution or weather the storm and then will jump the shark into total 1984 or some variation. 

It's already here with google search. They got caught manipulating the suggested search before the election. Also, search is broken, and youtube search is now broken.

Even worse may be China, and what Google is doing there.

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-45653035

The letter alleges Google is working on:

A prototype interface designed to allow a Chinese joint venture company to search for a given user's search queries based on their phone number

An extensive censorship blacklist developed in accordance with Chinese government demands. Among others, it contained the English term "human rights", the Mandarin terms for 'student protest' and 'Nobel prize', and very large numbers of phrases involving 'Xi Jinping' and other members of the CCP

Explicit code to ensure only Chinese government-approved air quality data would be returned in response to Chinese users' search

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On September 28, 2018 at 11:32 AM, DaysOff said:

Get your ass to the library and look it up in the Encyclopedia Britannica like we did in the olden days if you're worried about search results.

I pine for the days when a search engine would actually search vs. returning whatever it's advertisers were paying. Is there an actual search engine anymore?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/29/2018 at 9:17 PM, bernorange said:

Duckduckgo.Com

I posted that from a mobile previously, so I wasn't able to fully expound upon it. 

I highly recommend that you change the default search engine in your web browser to https://www.duckduckgo.com/ or another search engine of your choice . Google lives off of the ad revenue from it's search engine. If you don't want to support them, stop using their search engine.

Quote

DuckDuckGo (DDG) is an Internet search engine that emphasizes protecting searchers' privacy and avoiding the filter bubble of personalized search results.[3] DuckDuckGo distinguishes itself from other search engines by not profiling its users and by deliberately showing all users the same search results for a given search term,[5] and emphasizes returning the best results, rather than the most results, generating those results from over 400 individual sources, including crowdsourced sites such as Wikipedia, and other search engines like Bing, Yahoo!, and Yandex.[6][7]
...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuckDuckGo

Edited by bernorange
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other day I searched for a plumber on my phone and it came up with a number for the company and I clicked it and rang then played a recording that said, "Google or its partners may record this call..." I hung up and called a different company. Fuck Google wanting permission to actually record my phone call. I bet most people don't even think twice about that though.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Quote

... the internet giant went on the record Wednesday to make clear that even if it does discriminate on the basis of political viewpoints -- which it denies -- it can’t be forced to change. Not only would it be wrong to compel a private company to guarantee free speech in the way that government censorship is forbidden by the Constitution, but it would also have “disastrous practical consequences,” Google said in a court filing.

“The First Amendment appropriately limits the government’s ability to censor speech, but applying those limitations to private online platforms would undermine important content regulation,” the company said. “If they are bound by the same First Amendment rules that apply to the government, YouTube and other service providers would lose much of their ability to protect their users against offensive or objectionable content -- including pornography, hate speech, personal attacks, and terrorist propaganda.”

Google’s argument that YouTube isn’t a “public forum” and therefore is not subject to the First Amendment isn’t novel -- it’s based on a long history of rulings by U.S. courts. In its filing, Google is urging the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to dismiss a challenge by Prager University, a nonprofit producer of conservative videos on public affairs topics that accused the Alphabet Inc. unit of using its filter for age-appropriate content to illegally restrict access to Prager’s content.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-11-01/google-to-bias-accusers-regulating-youtube-would-be-disastrous

I agree with Google's private property argument.  I posted this mainly to illustrate that Google will justify censoring content on their platforms as they see fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grade of D as in David said:

Nope. If they didn't break up the banks after the too big to fail bullshit, Google sure isn't getting broken up. 

Well then I’m glad I’m so deep in the Google/Nest web that I couldn’t get out if I tried

Edited by Neonmoon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"This is the impenetrable banality of “don’t be evil.” They believe that they are doing good. And that is a problem."

-from that Julian Assange article.    Rings true, since nobody thinks they're the bad guy.   Egotists always think they're doing the right thing.

Apparently, Google was doing its own CIA type operations in foreign countries.  (some of the thing they were doing did actually seem 'good'?)

The takeaway seems to be that Google is part of the US Government.  Which isn't new news, I guess.  But it's very interesting to read all of the dates and players and places.

I read a dystopian comedy novel called 'Making Monsters' recently.  It's set in a future where geographic states have been replaced by Corporate States.   I really don't think we're too far from that becoming reality. 

At some point ,US corporations are going to get tired of using lobbyist/middlemen and they'll just buy themselves an amendment that makes them states and start electing their own congressmen.  

Edited by Monster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Breaking up Google wouldn't have the same ripple effects throughout the world economy as breaking up the major financial institutions would.

Any single entity deciding what information to deciminate to the masses should scare the hell out everyone.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 11/14/2018 at 12:07 PM, Smax said:

Breaking up Google wouldn't have the same ripple effects throughout the world economy as breaking up the major financial institutions would.

Any single entity deciding what information to deciminate to the masses should scare the hell out everyone.

This. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
Quote

...
Gizmodo's Kashmir Hill recently accepted a monumental challenge: blocking tech giants from her everyday life due to privacy concerns and sheer curiosity. But she took the challenge to extreme lengths to demonstrate just how pervasive these companies are beyond just the apps they provide.

How? By actively blocking all communication with Google's 8,699,648 (!) IP addresses on every device she owned. Not merely finding alternatives for the various Google apps we all rely on, but preventing those devices from pinging a single Google server.

The results were both calamitous and eye-opening.
...

More:  https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2019/04/09/heres-the-shocking-reality-of-completely-blocking-google-from-your-life/#6ad978921fec

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Just now, Gene Parmesan said:

I only use it because my wife doesn't know what it is and therefore won't be looking at the search history if I forget to go incognito mode.

Switch your default search engine to duckduckgo.com.  Change your browser setting to delete browsing history every time you close the browser.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, bernorange said:

Switch your default search engine to duckduckgo.com.  Change your browser setting to delete browsing history every time you close the browser. 

yeap, and when you want to watch something on youtube, search for it through duckduckgo's video search, then view the youtube video through the embedded results. 

google just knows way too much

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a side note about the thread title, I’ve never fully understood that “do no evil” is some type of value to be admired.  It’s setting the bar fairly low.  

Would you utilize bank who’s motto is “we won’t steal your money”. Or does google reward their employees who’s annual goal is to “not steal google IP”.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...