Google deletes “communist bandits” from comments on Youtube

Post by pfundstein » Tue, May 19, 2020, 12:13 AM UTC

subsubzero wrote: post #560

giancarlostoro wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly about a year ago I decided to switch to an iPhone once the "contract" is up. I have used iOS and I didnt find it anymore special, but it isn't really that much different to me to be bothered by using either one. I will also take that moment to ungooglify my life including email and such.

I did the same a few years back, use duck duck go for search, iphone for phone, apple maps for directions, firefox|safari|brave for browser, it is really easy to get google out of your life, only thing I am still looking to replace is mail, if anyone has found something that is free(or relatively cheap) and is reliable I'd love to know.

Post by pwdisswordfish2 » Tue, May 19, 2020, 12:37 AM UTC

gumby wrote: post #677

SilasX wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At risk of nitpicking, why do say "controls" rather than e.g. "services" or "handles"? When you say "controls" it's like you're saying Google has some kind of monopoly power that makes it hard to switch. And yet anyone can easily switch to e.g. DuckDuckGo. If that's a monopoly, it's not quite the kind of a monopoly we should generally be worried about. Browsers would be a different issue. In that case, there are netw…

I don’t think it’s a nitpick at all. I agree that google is a private company and searchers have the option of using a different search at the click of an icon. Usually I consider terms like “control” to be hotheaded but if you substitute “is in control of Which results are returned” you can see the consequence could be nefarious. This understanding informed antitrust theory up to the 1980s. I don’t use Google for an…

Post by throwaway122378 » Tue, May 19, 2020, 12:48 AM UTC

socrates1998 wrote: post #245

I can't fathom how private companies still think that they can make the CCP happy AND their western customers. The CCP holds values that are completely untenable to western values. As time goes on, companies who don't know this will lose massive brand value in the western world. The NBA has managed to tight rope this so far, but I doubt they can hold it together for very much longer. The CCP is still calling for the…

Post by smegger001 » Tue, May 19, 2020, 12:52 AM UTC

Causality1 wrote: post #765

koheripbal wrote: post #112

I think a more fundamental problem is a single private company having a near-monopoly on various public communication channels, and having financial interests in various global dictatorships. The Founding Fathers could not have predicted this. Google's "We're a private company" get-out-jail-free card cannot continue to apply.

We desperately need a Post Office of internet content. At-cost hosting and completely content-agnostic.

Post by rnotaro » Tue, May 19, 2020, 1:36 AM UTC

TechBro8615 wrote: post #809

crocodiletears wrote: post #803

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would be an incredible public service. While I believe Google is within its right to censor information on their platforms, the opacity with-which they do it is imo unacceptable, given the scale of their influence on the public dialogue. Similarly, I think any media conglomerate should be required to publish any formal lists of in-house gag-orders.

Ironically, it was google that first innovated along these lines with their “chilling effects” project. Any time a URL was removed via a copyright complaint, they would log it. If a search result was censored, you could see the copyright complaint. I’m not sure if they still do this.