Google says adding more AI to its search engine will rejuvenate the internet. Others predict an apocalypse for websites. One thing is clear: this era of online history is closing.
Blaming google is like blaming the gun for killing someone, google gonna do what google gonna do, it’s up to the consumer to effect change through attention.
To a degree perhaps. It has also monopolised industries that feed into each other. Even if you choose not to use their consumer products, you are being used by them as the product in these industries if you use the web at all, which is most of their business model. That isn’t consumer choice. Political intervention is one hope, which in some countries I guess there is some consumer power over, if consumers were to collectivise to a degree more valuable than the lobbying power of this monster. The internet was turned into the yellowpages with sharp teeth by google .
The two approaches you mention need not be mutually exclusive. I ditched google services more than 10 years ago, while loving somewhere they did some truly despicable antidemocratic things. but so what? They’re a corporation. There are political lobby groups, privacy foundations and advocacy groups you can contribute to. Despite being respectfully evangelical with those around me, most other than a fringe really don’t care enough about this. Doesn’t mean I’ll stop. I will still suggest alternatives. They’re my principles. you’re working in their interest if you tell your allies to give up. I understand and share the cynicism around political process especially in democratic nations with disappointing levels of corporate influence over legislation, we can only engage in it best we can, as well as exerting our rights as consumers. The critical mass required may seem insurmountable but negativity toward those effectively on your side is not going to help either.
How about taking responsibility and just not using services that require it.
Google has shaped the web into what it is over decades so that they could maintain their position of power. This is the very essence and purpose of a monopoly. Yet here you are trying to blame anything but the monopoly for the monopoly’s existence.
Nothing like convincing hundreds of millions of people to abandon a company rather than put any pressure on the small group of greedy people who own it.
Listen man, if thats what you think is best, you keep using them and try to effect change, good luck, im just not going to use services like that and have the problem solved for myself. Let me know when you’ve made something happen and I’ll even apologise.
Blaming google is like blaming the gun for killing someone, google gonna do what google gonna do, it’s up to the consumer to effect change through attention.
No, it’s Google changing their algorithm to feed you AI slop.
The first page and a half of Google results now is just AI-generated comparison websites. That’s by design.
Use another search provider then, it’s what’s called consumer discretion and historically has the best chance of effecting an outcome.
Okay Bot.
#1 most butthurt response ever.
Nah, i just know a bot when I see one.
Beep boop butthurt.
Good bot
Well no, it’s not, because they have multiple monopolies. So we should blame them and blame government for not stopping them.
Exactly, it’s counter-productive to blame individuals for doing the best they know how in a broken system.
Where do monopolies get their money?
From the consumers of necessary services that they have wholly captured…?
To a degree perhaps. It has also monopolised industries that feed into each other. Even if you choose not to use their consumer products, you are being used by them as the product in these industries if you use the web at all, which is most of their business model. That isn’t consumer choice. Political intervention is one hope, which in some countries I guess there is some consumer power over, if consumers were to collectivise to a degree more valuable than the lobbying power of this monster. The internet was turned into the yellowpages with sharp teeth by google .
Oh yes, political intervention, that’ll work, no chance of that turning out worse than what we have now.
How about taking responsibility and just not using services that require it. And I dont care if that’s a disadvantage to some, that’s the cost.
The two approaches you mention need not be mutually exclusive. I ditched google services more than 10 years ago, while loving somewhere they did some truly despicable antidemocratic things. but so what? They’re a corporation. There are political lobby groups, privacy foundations and advocacy groups you can contribute to. Despite being respectfully evangelical with those around me, most other than a fringe really don’t care enough about this. Doesn’t mean I’ll stop. I will still suggest alternatives. They’re my principles. you’re working in their interest if you tell your allies to give up. I understand and share the cynicism around political process especially in democratic nations with disappointing levels of corporate influence over legislation, we can only engage in it best we can, as well as exerting our rights as consumers. The critical mass required may seem insurmountable but negativity toward those effectively on your side is not going to help either.
Political intervention is what started Google, so I don’t see the problem.
Google has shaped the web into what it is over decades so that they could maintain their position of power. This is the very essence and purpose of a monopoly. Yet here you are trying to blame anything but the monopoly for the monopoly’s existence.
Nothing like convincing hundreds of millions of people to abandon a company rather than put any pressure on the small group of greedy people who own it.
Listen man, if thats what you think is best, you keep using them and try to effect change, good luck, im just not going to use services like that and have the problem solved for myself. Let me know when you’ve made something happen and I’ll even apologise.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod