If congress couldn't grok how Facebook operates I doubt they will be able to grok Google who in my opinion has a much more indirect (manipulative) way of getting people to view ads and gather data to show ads.
After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?
31–40 of 255 posts
Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?
#32Google knows far more about me than Facebook. But their product is not premised on my genuine identity, or the sharing of my social graph with apps. Google has been pretty good at preserving the illusion of "anonymous browsing".
> their product is not premised on my genuine identity
Their product to you may not be, but their primary revenue stream sure is based on the premise of knowing your genuine identity (including habits.)
Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Their tools are 10x better than anything else for many cases, so you're simply doing yourself a disservice to not use them. I think that at this point that's basically only true for mapping, and they are losing ground on that, slowly. You've got stockholm syndrome.
I'll bite. What's actually better than: * Gmail * Search * Docs And all of the Integration that works cross platform for all of those.
Define better. Does offline capability, ownership of data/applications, ability to modify your software and privacy concerns count, just as examples?
Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?
#34If you frame the question as "how much value do I get from X in exchange for my data?" I think the answer is clear that Google > Facebook. G Search, Gmail, Analytics, Docs, YT (original home of Khan Academy) etc. all contribute to my learning and productivity...with FB the total opposite.
Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?
#35Concerned that google has so much info (https://myactivity.google.com/myactivity) I visited https://myaccount.google.com/activitycontrols to turn off Web & App Activity, but left Voice & Audio Activity on.
This breaks my google home.
I do not want Google to save 20 years of search history so I can use a stupid google home. For the first time I'm considering Apple's device.
This is a dark pattern Google
Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
That isnt going to happen under the current deregulatory administration.
it's unlikely to happen in any administration. proactive monitoring is cost prohibitive compared to reactive punishment and a legal framework for doing so. as you said, the latter is unlikely to be meaningfully strengthened. fines and enforcement must present a significantly larger liability than profit opportunity for any real changes to ever take place. else it's just written down as another expense of doing busine…
> proactive monitoring is cost prohibitive compared to reactive punishment and a legal framework for doing so
Just let ad networks pay for it. Ad networks had a chance of self-regulation but they failed.
Also, how are you going to catch them if you don't watch them?
Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?
#37This article is about (in favor of) censoring the youtube platform to make life easier for advertisers. That doesn't seem very related to the information leaks and level of granular individualized advertising that the Facebook platform provides and which can be used to negative effect by advertisers. To me this is a clumsy, lazy attempt to make lazy platform censorship seem "good" in the way that regulating how Faceb…
That CNN article they quote is nothing more than CNN disliking that Youtube is challenging them in viewers and ad money. CNN isn't exactly the bastion of legitimacy and journalistic standards either. They're also trying to take down true left wing media like Jimmy Dore, painting him as a 'conspiracy theorist' for not being certain about the Syrian gas attacks before the OPCW was even there , as real journalists shoul…
> nothing more than CNN disliking that Youtube is challenging them in viewers and ad money
Which is also what's behind journalists, bloggers, etc. all hating on Facebook too, but nobody ever wants to hear that.
Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?
#38The spark that triggered the current firestorm Facebook is facing has nothing to do with Facebook’s practices—those have been apparent and obvious since before Facebook is as even a company. The spark was the confluence of divisive political headwinds and an outrage-driven news cycle. I’m thankful that spark has resulted in sustained scrutiny of Facebook, but without a similar environment and controversy, I doubt Goo…
[deleted]
Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?
#39The key here is the reccomendation engine. Is an automatically-generated reccomendation an endorsement? If someone is watching "non-extreme" material and suddenly gets a conspiracy, far right, or propaganda video suggested to them, what responsibility does Google have for that reccomendation? To what extent is it possible for people to "self radicalise" from Youtube? (I've experienced this myself; an innocuous gaming…
I have similar anecdotes regarding youtube. My feed often randomly recommends "SJW owned compilation" and "feminism fails". I may have watched one or two videos from prominent feminists and their supposed opposition in 2011 but google is really waiting for me to get back to that particular political fight for some reason. How long do I have to ignore something before it goes away? It reminds me of how in the UK the t…
> My feed often randomly recommends "SJW owned compilation" and "feminism fails".
I had the same videos queue up in mine and nothing I watch seems even remotely related to that. My YouTube usage is pretty "family friendly" so it struck me as particularly odd to see such blatantly divisive hate videos.
I've even seen weird ads about deep state conspiracy stuff on there too. Their algorithms seem totally broken because I'm definitely not the right target for that stuff.
Re: After Facebook scrutiny, is Google next?
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
> proactive monitoring is cost prohibitive compared to reactive punishment and a legal framework for doing so Counterfactual: finance, another high-margin industry with a penchant for bad decision making, funds a proactive and multi-pronged regulatory apparatus. We are all safer for it.
in large part this is made easier because most money travels by known and monitored channels (banks, businesses certified to be money transmitters, etc) with very little going via cash. data on the other hand is a much more diverse & fluid asset that travels via a million unmonitored/encrypted channels and can be copied easily. if all money could be easily copied and most transactions were in cash, proactive regulati…
> data on the other hand is a much more diverse & fluid asset that travels via a million unmonitored/encrypted channels and can be copied easily
Securities are quite diverse. And people regularly try to get around securities regulation by calling their securities "stamps" or "tokens" or "coins" or whatever. A regulator for social media companies over a certain size might not be a bad idea. (My preference is consumer controls with strict penalties for non-compliance, à la how Illinois governs biometric data [1].)
[1] http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-facebook-taggi...