Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google: Open Letter to Australians

about.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 437 posts

Re: Google: Open Letter to Australians

#11

Post by throwaway45349 »

ImaCake wrote: post #6

Link to the draft law is below [0]. Quoted from that page: >The code also includes a set of ‘minimum standards’ for: >providing advance notice of changes to algorithmic ranking and presentation of news; appropriately recognising original news content; and >providing information about how and when Google and Facebook make available user data collected through users’ interactions with news content. This sounds great to…

AFAIK you're missing a crucial point - they're trying to require G/FB to pay out billions to old (read: dying) media publications, which will crush small publications. On the Open Web, ABC News should get the exact same treatment at JoeBloggsYT2020.

Re: Google: Open Letter to Australians

#12

Post by searchableguy »

throwaway45349 wrote: post #11
ImaCake wrote: post #6

Link to the draft law is below [0]. Quoted from that page: >The code also includes a set of ‘minimum standards’ for: >providing advance notice of changes to algorithmic ranking and presentation of news; appropriately recognising original news content; and >providing information about how and when Google and Facebook make available user data collected through users’ interactions with news content. This sounds great to…

AFAIK you're missing a crucial point - they're trying to require G/FB to pay out billions to old (read: dying) media publications, which will crush small publications. On the Open Web, ABC News should get the exact same treatment at JoeBloggsYT2020.

That's my main problem with it. Extend those minimum standards for everyone regardless of revenue and other selective filters.

Can someone explain what this means?

> providing information about how and when Google and Facebook make available user data collected through users’ interactions with news content.

Is it saying google or facebook need to tell news publication about when/which users are accessing thier content?

Re: Google: Open Letter to Australians

#13

Post by deminature »

throwaway45349 wrote: post #11
ImaCake wrote: post #6

Link to the draft law is below [0]. Quoted from that page: >The code also includes a set of ‘minimum standards’ for: >providing advance notice of changes to algorithmic ranking and presentation of news; appropriately recognising original news content; and >providing information about how and when Google and Facebook make available user data collected through users’ interactions with news content. This sounds great to…

AFAIK you're missing a crucial point - they're trying to require G/FB to pay out billions to old (read: dying) media publications, which will crush small publications. On the Open Web, ABC News should get the exact same treatment at JoeBloggsYT2020.

Murdoch's News Corporation and the currently incumbent Liberal party are very cosy with one another, so it's not surprising the government is legislating to prop them up financially. It's beneficial to consumers to have a well funded fourth estate, however I doubt this is being done out of public interest.

Re: Google: Open Letter to Australians

#14

Post by iamshs »

jp0d wrote: post #10

I'd probably trust the Australian govt to protect my data better than Google or even worse Facebook. The way the article has twisted the words in Google's favour is commendable though. Marketing really is everything.

Looking at how many people opted out of MyHealth over the concerns of Government having their data, I think your reason will not resonate with many.

Re: Google: Open Letter to Australians

#15

Post by AbrahamParangi »

jp0d wrote: post #10

I'd probably trust the Australian govt to protect my data better than Google or even worse Facebook. The way the article has twisted the words in Google's favour is commendable though. Marketing really is everything.

I can't agree, but to each his own.

Re: Google: Open Letter to Australians

#16

Post by vmception »

skissane wrote: post #3
slater wrote: post #2

404. Got a copy?

It appears they've blocked access to it from non-Australian IPs. Here is the HTML they serve to me: https://gist.githubusercontent.com/skissane/05bac6c78d99e359... Text: Open letter to Australians We need to let you know about new Government regulation that will hurt how Australians use Google Search and YouTube. A proposed law, the News Media Bargaining Code, would force us to provide you with a dramatically worse G…

> It appears they've blocked access to it from non-Australian IPs.

Wow, just turned on my residential VPN and selected my Australian server, can confirm it does load. Didn't even have to clear cookies.

Very sketchy google. Even if the Australian law has issues and alternatives cannot deliver for free, I would not support Google aims here. They are the big news business they are gaslighting into Australians into being afraid of.

I think I now want an auto-loader to compare websites accessed from different locations.

Re: Google: Open Letter to Australians

#17

Post by iamshs »

deminature wrote: post #13
throwaway45349 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK you're missing a crucial point - they're trying to require G/FB to pay out billions to old (read: dying) media publications, which will crush small publications. On the Open Web, ABC News should get the exact same treatment at JoeBloggsYT2020.

Murdoch's News Corporation and the currently incumbent Liberal party are very cosy with one another, so it's not surprising the government is legislating to prop them up financially. It's beneficial to consumers to have a well funded fourth estate, however I doubt this is being done out of public interest.

God forbid if Sky News corners a prominent real estate in my Youtube results, they are already atrocious and have insufferable comments.

Re: Google: Open Letter to Australians

#18

Post by mgraczyk »

ImaCake wrote: post #6

Link to the draft law is below [0]. Quoted from that page: >The code also includes a set of ‘minimum standards’ for: >providing advance notice of changes to algorithmic ranking and presentation of news; appropriately recognising original news content; and >providing information about how and when Google and Facebook make available user data collected through users’ interactions with news content. This sounds great to…

As somebody who works on ranking and personalization products, I can confidently assure you that you would not prefer a less personalized experience.

You don't have to take my word for it though, you can opt-out of personalization on Google here: https://myactivity.google.com/activitycontrols

Try it for a month and see if you prefer it.

Re: Google: Open Letter to Australians

#20

Post by shakna »

jp0d wrote: post #10

I'd probably trust the Australian govt to protect my data better than Google or even worse Facebook. The way the article has twisted the words in Google's favour is commendable though. Marketing really is everything.

> I'd probably trust the Australian govt to protect my data better than Google or even worse Facebook.

I would not.

The Australian government seems entirely incapable of creating any technical project of a decent size correctly. The list of disasters is quite long, but a few from recent memory are ones such as the census website which collapsed when people tried to use it [0] and the myGov project which has had so many data breaches [1].

Atop of which, the government's usual response to someone exposing flaws, is to attack them.

Whilst I don't want Google or Facebook to have my data, because they will use it in ways I don't appreciate, my government will leak it. And then claim it wasn't serious and excuse themselves from any repercussions.

[0] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-12/census-2016-site-up-a...

[1] https://www.smh.com.au/technology/revealed-serious-flaws-in-...

[2]

Post reply on HN