Imagine wikipedia and the top newspapers doing this ... users will start to use another search engine.
No, people will start to read other news sites.
Removing my site from Google search
51–60 of 119 posts
Re: Removing my site from Google search
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you explain what you mean by this? I’ve read it a few times and don’t understand
Sure. I probably could’ve been much more clearer. I don’t think Google taking your information and sharing it with advertisers is a great sin. Somewhat annoying but nothing particularly harmful. I do think the search results are easily manipulated and it can be frustrating trying to find relevant information. Like most people I end up defaulting to Reddit for search queries just to find something that isn’t a blog by…
[deleted]
Re: Removing my site from Google search
#53So if "surveillance capitalism" is apparently the new scare, would "surveillance socialism" be better? Or are we supposed to imagine that under socialism, there would be no need for Big Tech surveillance? This I most certainly disagree with. I'm just noticing a trend lately where the word "capitalism" is being attacked on many fronts, and I personally find that troublesome. Like Churchill said..."Capitalism is absolu…
I don't really understand why you would assume that the only alternative to surveillance capitalism is "surveillance socialism".
This sophism seems to be built on two errors:
* that there is nothing outside of pure capitalism and pure socialism
* that adjoining "surveillance" to capitalism means we're talking about an inevitable aspect of our society that is combined to capitalism, rather than a specific subset of the way business is done in this age.
To be honest, this lack of ability to conceive alternative social systems is concerning. The deformed Churchill quote comes as a cherry on top.
Re: Removing my site from Google search
#54So if "surveillance capitalism" is apparently the new scare, would "surveillance socialism" be better? Or are we supposed to imagine that under socialism, there would be no need for Big Tech surveillance? This I most certainly disagree with. I'm just noticing a trend lately where the word "capitalism" is being attacked on many fronts, and I personally find that troublesome. Like Churchill said..."Capitalism is absolu…
I can’t tell if you’re being willfully obtuse or not. Harvesting people’s data for the express purpose of manipulating them into thinking/buying things that they otherwise wouldn’t is wrong in every sense of the word.
Capitalism has its problems just like everything else. Pretending it doesn’t is just as disingenuous as pretending that socialism would fix everything. If you’re concerned about people attacking capitalism, help fix the problems. Simple as that.
Re: Removing my site from Google search
#55So if "surveillance capitalism" is apparently the new scare, would "surveillance socialism" be better? Or are we supposed to imagine that under socialism, there would be no need for Big Tech surveillance? This I most certainly disagree with. I'm just noticing a trend lately where the word "capitalism" is being attacked on many fronts, and I personally find that troublesome. Like Churchill said..."Capitalism is absolu…
Churchill was referring to democracy, not capitalism.
Re: Removing my site from Google search
#56So if "surveillance capitalism" is apparently the new scare, would "surveillance socialism" be better? Or are we supposed to imagine that under socialism, there would be no need for Big Tech surveillance? This I most certainly disagree with. I'm just noticing a trend lately where the word "capitalism" is being attacked on many fronts, and I personally find that troublesome. Like Churchill said..."Capitalism is absolu…
I'm interested in why this comment is getting so knocked down?
I asked what I think is a valid question and would like to hear honest reactions from people about my observation.
I feel I have every right to be a cheerleader for Capitalism as my father escaped communist Cuba in 1959 as Castro was coming to power and used the US's system and tons of hard work to create a extremely comfortable life for himself, while friends and family members who stayed there lived rather wretched lives.
He never forgot how lucky he was to be able to get out of there just in time and told me time and time again that the US while having flaws, was by far the best place in the world to live, so my original comment comes from this background.
I don't give a flying fuck if the comment gets modded down, but i would like to know just what in it is so offensive to those modding it donw so I can learn something.
Re: Removing my site from Google search
#57So if "surveillance capitalism" is apparently the new scare, would "surveillance socialism" be better? Or are we supposed to imagine that under socialism, there would be no need for Big Tech surveillance? This I most certainly disagree with. I'm just noticing a trend lately where the word "capitalism" is being attacked on many fronts, and I personally find that troublesome. Like Churchill said..."Capitalism is absolu…
I don't really understand why you would assume that the only alternative to surveillance capitalism is "surveillance socialism". This sophism seems to be built on two errors: * that there is nothing outside of pure capitalism and pure socialism * that adjoining "surveillance" to capitalism means we're talking about an inevitable aspect of our society that is combined to capitalism, rather than a specific subset of th…
Of course there are an infinite number of alternatives...I just quickly picked something that sounded decent that tried to make my point about my observation lately that Capitalism was getting knocked around everywhere I looked.
In the last Econtalk podcast that I listened to last night, they discussed the loneliness "epidemic" and the author ended up blaming Thatcher-based Capitalism as perhaps the main reason why people are so lonely today!
I thought that was quite the stretch but imagine my chagrin when here was another spurious back-handed attack on it.
Re: Removing my site from Google search
#58A more interesting issue is the opposite -- many large sites have robots.txt rules that Disallow all crawlers except Google. A new search engine either 100% respects robots.txt with the result that some major properties are completely unavailable in their index, ignore robots.txt in these special cases where robots.txt configuration is unreasonable, or- crawl anything that allows Google to crawl it. None of these options are great.
Re: Removing my site from Google search
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean technically that says that your site won't appear in search results, not that your site won't be used to profile people, determine other site ratings based on your site's content etc. they won't show your site's content, but that doesn't mean they won't use your site's content.
I thought that (i.e. removing the site from google search) was the goal. I'd review the other usage on a case by case basis; e.g. determining ratings of other sites seems fair use to me. I'd guess you're allowing others to use your site's content when you're making your site public (TINLA).
maybe, but I guess I would be cantankerous enough to see the goal as preventing google from profiting off your site.
Re: Removing my site from Google search
#60So I did a search for the title of his blog post to see what comes up, this HN page is top hit.