- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
When “Don’t be evil” conflicts with profits then “Don’t be evil” gotta go.
Google be like:
Don’t be evil; LOL!
I think to become what we can as a species, one big decision must be „if don‘t be evil conflicts with profits, then maybe your company should review their income streams“
If you oppose this, don’t just comment and complain, contact your antitrust authority today:
US:
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/report-antitrust-violation
EU:
https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/antitrust/contact_en
comp-greffe-antitrust@ec.europa.eu
UK:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tell-the-cma-about-a-competition-or-market-problem
France:
https://signal.conso.gouv.fr/fr/tel-internet-media/faire-un-signalement
Germany: @kartellamt@social.bund.de (anti-cartel bureau) of @BMWK https://www.bundeskartellamt.de/DE/Kartellverbot/Anonyme_Hinweise/anonymehinweise_node.html https://www.bundeskartellamt.de/DE/Missbrauchsaufsicht/missbrauchsaufsicht_node.html
Philippines:
https://www.phcc.gov.ph/file-a-complaint/
India:
https://www.cci.gov.in/antitrust/
https://www.cci.gov.in/filing/atd
Canada:
https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/frm-eng/GHÉT-7TDNA5
US FTC’s statement about Google and antitrust investigation back in 2013.
We nonetheless recognize that some of Google’s algorithm and design changes resulted
in the demotion of websites that could, collectively, be considered threats to Google’s search
business… On the other hand, these changes to Google’s search algorithm could reasonably be
viewed as improving the overall quality of Google’s search results because the first search page
now presented the user with a greater diversity of websites.Rather, we conclude that Google’s display of its own content could plausibly be viewed as an improvement
in the overall quality of Google’s search productYeah. FTC is going to do jack-crap about the situation given the tools that they currently have. The FTC is on purpose weak, the US Congress has sought to weaken it over the last three decades. People can go leave a comment on the FTC’s website, but don’t forget, US citizens, to stop by the House and the Senate. And if you need some background, here and here.
Now all that said, this isn’t posted to discourage, it’s posted to get you focused on what hinders the FTC.
Reporting it is a great idea.
I still need to get my head around what Google is doing and what the effects are, as previous experience says making reports to regulators tends to be more effective when I explain exactly what I’m complaining about. I once got the Solicitors Regulatory Authority (UK) to investigate a firm that was abusing process; after hundreds of complaints from hundreds of people, mine was the complaint they acted on (and I was the only person who got any updates on their investigation.) The right wording matters!
So once I’m sure I fully understand what I’m complaining about, off to the CMA I will go.
Done. Thanks for mentioning this.
I mean… they dropped hte “dont be evil” tag, ages ago… which heralded the next phase of Google… “we are for sure going to be doing evil.”
Even then, “Don’t be evil” literally only ever covered “Don’t put ads before real search results” which was obviously tossed out the fucking window nearly a decade ago.
Search results like it should be.
Luckily it’s Google. They’ll release it, half arse it for two years then cancel it without warning.
Not this one. Collecting data and serving ads is their core business. They cancel and change products that enable the core, but never the gist of their business.
Will have to see…
I’d say that depends on how profitable it is - services like AdSense and gmail are still going strong some 20 years after being introduced!
Ha. Never a truer summary of Google’s competence in anything other than spamming adverts at you.
But this serves that core competence of spamming adverts at you
Hopefully…
Everything google touches turns to shit. Unfortunately they have ideas about owning the web and I cannot tell them to fuck off hard enough
Fire fox, Fire fox;
Fuck you Google;
We’re throwing rocks.
Alpha bet, Alpha bet;
Farming data is,
stalking/theft.
Goes against what they “said” they stood for, but never really took it seriously.
See: Literally every company ever.
Yep!
Something…Something…a hero. Something…Something…become the villain.
— Harvey Dent
That’s because Google is on the far side of the track that tech companies follow.
They start out as people passionate about what they are doing. As those people leave they tend to replaced by spreadsheet readers that only have a passion for personal gain.Everything Google is doing now is against what it once stood for.
“to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.”
“to display the most profitable advertisement even if it contains misinformation”
“do no evil”
DELETED
“against authoritarian government censorship”
“let’s try to develop a censored search engine for China”
and many more…
Glad I deleted my gmail account, a gateway to google walled garden, years ago. Even if google put Digital Restriction Management on its shitty browser I would use Firefox and Pale moon browser. Never been a a fan of chromi-shitty-um
It’s not just about Chrome though. With this they can force websites to use this API by intimidating them with not giving adsense money. And that website will deny your connection because you don’t use Chrome.
Hopefully EU will step in since this is basically abuse of dominance.
Everything Google once claimed to stand for.
It goes against everything Google Said it stood for.
Google has been like this from the start.
Google never stood for anything other than making as much money as possible. Sergio Brin and Larry Page only coined the whole “Don’t be Evil” shtick to fool people into thinking they had more privacy with Google than with Microsoft’s Bing search engine. Neither were any kind of moralist.
For me the majority of my usage will go nicely with firefox. None of the streaming apps or services I use require DRM, because they are piracy sites. I don’t give a damn about pirating. Only if it is implemented then some banking services I use or food delivery service gonna use this. Which I don’t mind using chrome for. All others will be done through firefox. We can’t do anything against all these. So find some loop holes in the coming times to make it in our favor.
