Google v. Almost Everyone

[Pacomia]

EDIT: why is california not doing an antitrust investigation
did bapple and goggle bribe the state government

Threaten to pull money and jobs. Same reason Boeing has the Washington state government over its knees.

Ugh, don’t remind me. Still pissed at my local government for constantly sucking up to Amazon.

[-Ocelot-]

So which services that google offers are actually bad?

None afaik. Google makes great services and constantly experiments with new things.

The thread has nothing to do with that.

I'm not against regulating the new technologies companies like Google are exploiting so that they can get away with censorship, but they need to go about it logically.

Google has its faults, so-called "censorship" isn't one of them.

[Australian rePublic]

Google is getting in trouble with the USA? GOOD! Remind me to inform the USA of those lying scum bags who lie to the government. Do you think the FTC will heed the complaints of foreigners? If not, which organisation will? (I thought that the US embassy ignored me, but upon second examination, it's possible that they never received my email. It's also possible that they ignored me)

Can Youtube just go back to the days when there were barely any copyright strikes?

It just happens that so many creators get copyright striked and most of it isn’t even a full song, scene, it’s just some music or known scene then, bam! Copyrighted.

They should make the copyrighting process slower.

Google doesn't hire people to review things. You think they're the largest company in the world by paying people? No. Google use piece of shit algorithms that punish the innocent and reward the wrong-doer. Trust me. I know. They lied to the government with regards to me

[Yuyencia]

I am congratulate ability public confront wicked Google mans immorality

[Infected Mushroom]

My brother works for Google.

So I do have an interest in this issue. I’m definitely pro Google.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Meh, get back to me when they go after the corporatists in the federal and various state governments that enable this kind of monopolizing in the first place.

[Petrolheadia]

Bing, DuckDuckGo, iOS, Dailymotion, Vimeo, Dropbox, a multitude of email providers, etc.... monopoly my ass.

We typically think in terms of “credible competition” when we talk about monopolies.

And what is not credible in them?

[Petrolheadia]

Can Youtube just go back to the days when there were barely any copyright strikes?

It just happens that so many creators get copyright striked and most of it isn’t even a full song, scene, it’s just some music or known scene then, bam! Copyrighted.

They should make the copyrighting process slower.

Well, that's how copyright works. No matter how much or how little of the original work is used, the creator still retains rights to at least part of the proceeds from it.

[Galloism]

We typically think in terms of “credible competition” when we talk about monopolies.

And what is not credible in them?

Usually we look at it in terms of percentage of market share.

When we broke up standard oil, they had like 85% market share, iirc.

[Andsed]

Good. Monopolies like google only lead to stagnation and companies being able to implent whatever they want due to little competition.

[Estanglia]

Good.

Google has too much of a stranglehold.

I don't think that is the argument.

I meant bad as in 'have problems.' Why should we care about the size of google?

Because a near-monopoly/ a monopoly gives a company free reign to do what they want in the industry with little fear of competition taking their customers.

Google puts in shady trackers and steals your data? What are you gonna do about that? No competitor is big enough to hit Google where it hurts for it. Google can do it with little punishment and, if the profits outweigh the few losses to competitors, what's stopping them?

For the crime of being a Monopoly.

Bing, DuckDuckGo, iOS, Dailymotion, Vimeo, Dropbox, a multitude of email providers, etc.... monopoly my ass.

Are any of those (with the exceptions of iOS and maybe Dropbox) anywhere near the size, influence and reach of Google?

[Salandriagado]

So which services that google offers are actually bad?

The data farming and selling of said data, directly or otherwise. Because that's the service that they provide: everything else is just a method of acquiring said data.

[Gormwood]

For the crime of being a Monopoly.

I heard that's not illegal in America.

Apparently the Sherman Antitrust Act is fake news.

[Gormwood]

Wait until it comes out that Google is just as negligent with personal information or even more so than Facebook.

[Page]

I have absolutely zero trust in Google and other big tech companies, but I also have zero trust in government to regulate them in a way that doesn't serve state interests at the expense of the people, so it's a really unfortunate catch-22. Pick your poison, Silicon Valley or Washington DC, both are highly toxic.

[Pacomia]

I have absolutely zero trust in Google and other big tech companies, but I also have zero trust in government to regulate them in a way that doesn't serve state interests at the expense of the people, so it's a really unfortunate catch-22. Pick your poison, Silicon Valley or Washington DC, both are highly toxic. I have absolutely zero trust in Google and other big tech companies, but I also have zero trust in government to regulate them in a way that doesn't serve state interests at the expense of the people, so it's a really unfortunate catch-22. Pick your poison, Silicon Valley or Washington DC, both are highly toxic.

I choose Olympia. Local government is better.

[Cekoviu]

Bing, DuckDuckGo, iOS, Dailymotion, Vimeo, Dropbox, a multitude of email providers, etc.... monopoly my ass.

We typically think in terms of “credible competition” when we talk about monopolies.

Are iOS and Dropbox not credible competition to you?

[Galloism]

We typically think in terms of “credible competition” when we talk about monopolies.

Are iOS and Dropbox not credible competition to you?

iOS yes, dropbox probably, duckduckgo probably not.

[Grand Britannia]

I'm not against regulating the new technologies companies like Google are exploiting so that they can get away with censorship, but they need to go about it logically.

Google has its faults, so-called "censorship" isn't one of them.

I'm sure when they announced they filter out whatever they thought was fake from their search results was not any thinly veiled attempt at censorship of whatever they dont like.

[-Ocelot-]

Google has its faults, so-called "censorship" isn't one of them.

I'm sure when they announced they filter out whatever they thought was fake from their search results was not any thinly veiled attempt at censorship of whatever they dont like.

Youtube made harder to look for videos advocating for genocides/violence and conspiracy theories that have led some people to commit mass shootings e.g: New Zealand.

Youtube wants to keep extremists away. That's a far cry from "censorship".

Should Youtube allow ISIS members of freely posting propaganda in their platform to avoid censorship? I don't think so.

[Petrolheadia]

We typically think in terms of “credible competition” when we talk about monopolies.

Are iOS and Dropbox not credible competition to you?

Also Firefox, Edge, all the big email providers...

[Grand Britannia]

I'm sure when they announced they filter out whatever they thought was fake from their search results was not any thinly veiled attempt at censorship of whatever they dont like.

Youtube made harder to look for videos advocating for genocides/violence and conspiracy theories that have led some people to commit mass shootings e.g: New Zealand.

Youtube wants to keep extremists away. That's a far cry from "censorship".

Should Youtube allow ISIS members of freely posting propaganda in their platform to avoid censorship? I don't think so.

YouTube also takes down videos that have anything remotely right wing with no nuance to it. The "we're fighting extremism" is the same rhetoric the government uses to keep the patriot act around.

[-Ocelot-]

Youtube made harder to look for videos advocating for genocides/violence and conspiracy theories that have led some people to commit mass shootings e.g: New Zealand.

Youtube wants to keep extremists away. That's a far cry from "censorship".

Should Youtube allow ISIS members of freely posting propaganda in their platform to avoid censorship? I don't think so.

YouTube also takes down videos that have anything remotely right wing with no nuance to it. The "we're fighting extremism" is the same rhetoric the government uses to keep the patriot act around.

Because "right-wing" videos advocate for violence and pogroms quite often, usually in a sly manner. YT doesn't want to eject people because of their political beliefs, quite the opposite. They want to have everyone on their platform to prevent spill outs to other video hosting websites, and maximize their ad revenue.

So YT demonetizing (t. losing money on purpose) channels or forcing users out is bad for them, but they still have to do so to remove extremist content and prevent it from showing up on recommended, to billions of people worldwide. If there is someone losing from this, it's YT.

[Necroghastia]

Youtube made harder to look for videos advocating for genocides/violence and conspiracy theories that have led some people to commit mass shootings e.g: New Zealand.

Youtube wants to keep extremists away. That's a far cry from "censorship".

Should Youtube allow ISIS members of freely posting propaganda in their platform to avoid censorship? I don't think so.

YouTube also takes down videos that have anything remotely right wing with no nuance to it. The "we're fighting extremism" is the same rhetoric the government uses to keep the patriot act around.

Pull the other one.

[Major-Tom]

At least with google you know it'll work. With most of the other tech companies that isn't guaranteed.

Google's efficiency isn't the issue, it's the effective choke-hold it has over it's respective industry. It's a ghastly monopoly, pure and simple, and anti-trust legislation shouldn't just target Google, but also Amazon, Facebook and several other tech companies.