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

Google has a secret deal with FB called “Jedi Blue” that they knew was illegal

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 428 posts

Re: Google has a secret deal with FB called “Jedi Blue” that they knew was illegal

#341

Post by specto »

qnsi wrote: post #8

What can we as people in top 1% with 1) information about big tech abuses 2) skills to fix this do? Individually we can use browsers like firefox or brave and probably donate time or money to them, but I think it's not enough. I think we would need something like a movement against those abuses, but probably the biggest win would be a business model that could win with them in the free market. Is this possible? Has a…

I suppose it's true most people here (not me) is part of the 1% but man it seems strange no one questions this.

Re: Google has a secret deal with FB called “Jedi Blue” that they knew was illegal

#342

Post by alfalfasprout »

smegger001 wrote: post #336

I don't think i understand how this was supposed to benefit Google? just making facebook bid like everyone else would surely have just raised the floor as everyone had to compete with them, where this way google makes less on the ads sold to facebook.

The point was to kill header bidding altogether forcing people onto google's exchange. Or some portion of the time, facebook's exchange.

Basically Google and Facebook wanted to create a walled garden where you're more or less forced to bid on their ad exchanges. Since they control the ad exchange they can front-run everyone and bid using insider info.

By eliminating all other competitors Google and FB can basically collude to split the pie.

Re: Google has a secret deal with FB called “Jedi Blue” that they knew was illegal

#343

Post by yosito »

jl6 wrote: post #338
qnsi wrote: post #8

What can we as people in top 1% with 1) information about big tech abuses 2) skills to fix this do? Individually we can use browsers like firefox or brave and probably donate time or money to them, but I think it's not enough. I think we would need something like a movement against those abuses, but probably the biggest win would be a business model that could win with them in the free market. Is this possible? Has a…

You could refuse to hire anyone who has worked for ad-tech in recent history.

How does forcing people who recently made a bad judgement call to continue making a bad judgement call achieve anything positive?

Re: Google has a secret deal with FB called “Jedi Blue” that they knew was illegal

#344

Post by monopoledance »

Angostura wrote: post #319
monopoledance wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Working for Google and Facebook has other ethical implications…. but that’s not what I was referring to. > huge demand That’s my point. Stop working for those small and big businesses in need of pushing solutions to problems they invented. Tho, you seem to imply an ideological/apologetical take on the economy, which isn’t exactly helpful, in any case. The tautology “it exists because it exists” can comfortably offer…

> Stop working for those small and big businesses in need of pushing solutions to problems they invented. I've been trying to think of examples, but it's difficult. Google originally thrived because its Search engine pushed a solution for a well-established problem. It's ad business solved a problem for advertisers - and site operators who wanted things simplified. Even Facebook offered a way for people to keep in to…

I don’t believe you.

Landfills rapidly filling with last year’s “innovation“ and people getting increasingly dissatisfied with their jobs, because they lost touch with the actual product they are allegedly working on, should be an indication on a larger scale…

Apart from all those wonders of petrol-chemistry, like fast-fashion: Short smartphone cycles with minuscule improvements; Uber and food delivery services offering nothing, but minor convenience in exchange for a race to the bottom in worker exploitation (very genius. such innovation.); e-scooter sharing services disposing LiPo batteries in every larger city’s water bodies; X as a service; everyone having advice for sale; every fart commercially exploited…

Sorry, I really don’t believe you, if you tell me you haven’t noticed the economy getting high on its own supply. C’mon, whole sectors are “content creation” and engagement manufacturing for the sake of selling ads, or creating yet another f2p mobile game optimized for getting the kidz addicted.

I mean, just turn off adblock and see for yourself. Someone made all that shit!

Re: Google has a secret deal with FB called “Jedi Blue” that they knew was illegal

#345

Post by ladberg »

stackbutterflow wrote: post #244
lamontcg wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone reading this on Chrome should switch their browser today. Get off of Gmail while you're at it. There is no perfect alternative, but all those reasons why you think you can't switch don't add up to anything a fraction as bad as what Google is doing.

What's a good alternative to gmail? Fastmail? Protonmail? Other? I don't mind paying a small subscription.

I use Gmail but never use the web interface (or log in with it at all for the most part). I just use the built in mail clients for iOS/macOS but any app will do. They can still see your mail but can't do much with it as I use DDG for the most part and am logged into a different account for stuff like YouTube.

Re: Google has a secret deal with FB called “Jedi Blue” that they knew was illegal

#346

Post by crawfordcomeaux »

salawat wrote: post #217
crawfordcomeaux wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meets all needs while denying none. Establish a category theory based foundation of human needs, which will necessarily include the environment and its needs, and all legislation must show how it meets the fundamental needs and all of their compositions, (eg. every need composes with the need for learning to result in the need to learn how to identify and meet any given need).

Needs of whom? How are mutually exclusive needs reconciled? It's not anywhere as easy or free of potential villainy as you think.

Needs of all. What is an example of a mutually exclusive need?

Re: Google has a secret deal with FB called “Jedi Blue” that they knew was illegal

#347

Post by grumbel »

jollybean wrote: post #59
yobbo wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would anyone compete with a scam business model? Ad buyers don't care if it's effective. Or rather they need convincing-looking gibberish to convince their bosses that they're worthwhile. Bosses don't want to seem stupid and are afraid of missing out, so they let it continue. I suppose a free-speech distributed search service could make a difference if it was actually better than google. Imagine with distributed…

"Ad buyers don't care if it's effective." Yes, they definitely do.

Then why are Internet ads so terrible? Ever more annoying ways to present ads might make people accidentally click on an ad, but seem like a bad way of getting people to buy the product. Even video ads are generally terrible, many of them fail to even tell me the name of the thing I am supposed to buy before that 'Skip'-timer has run out.

The Internet would offer so many different and better ways to keep consumers informative about new products.

Re: Google has a secret deal with FB called “Jedi Blue” that they knew was illegal

#348

Post by 9387367 »

qnsi wrote: post #8

What can we as people in top 1% with 1) information about big tech abuses 2) skills to fix this do? Individually we can use browsers like firefox or brave and probably donate time or money to them, but I think it's not enough. I think we would need something like a movement against those abuses, but probably the biggest win would be a business model that could win with them in the free market. Is this possible? Has a…

Individually, we must build alternatives and don’t give up and if it works out, don’t sell out.

Look at lichess.org, it’s possible.

Re: Google has a secret deal with FB called “Jedi Blue” that they knew was illegal

#349

Post by bigiain »

dzonga wrote: post #323
qnsi wrote: post #8

What can we as people in top 1% with 1) information about big tech abuses 2) skills to fix this do? Individually we can use browsers like firefox or brave and probably donate time or money to them, but I think it's not enough. I think we would need something like a movement against those abuses, but probably the biggest win would be a business model that could win with them in the free market. Is this possible? Has a…

stop working at those companies. but a good number of people around these parts have already decided going through fb/google hazing is worth it for the paycheck. screw ethics. you already know, once a company reaches monopoly position, a lot of corners have been cut and it has been unethical. that's a discussion HN at large is not ready to have atm.

"You can’t buy ethics offsets for the terrible things you do at your day job."

and:

"But here’s the thing. You can’t help Uber build Greyball during the day, or help Palantir design databases to round up immigrants as your main gig, and then buy ethics offsets by doing a non-profit side hustle. We need you to work ethically during that day job much more than we need you working with that non-profit."

-- https://deardesignstudent.com/ethics-cant-be-a-side-hustle-b...

Re: Google has a secret deal with FB called “Jedi Blue” that they knew was illegal

#350

Post by kadoban »

bqmjjx0kac wrote: post #328
matheusmoreira wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tell everyone about Firefox and uBlock Origin. Blocking YouTube ads is enough of an argument to convince anyone to at least try it out. I've never seen someone who didn't love the ad-free web experience. It's actually safe to just install this software on random computers: people's quality of life will be invisibly yet thoroughly improved, they will notice that things are just better even if they can't explain why.…

Huh, I think it's really critical to understand that the ad blocker is there, so you can turn it off sometimes. I run across forms all the time that silently fail to submit until I turn off the ad blocker.

Really? I can think of maybe once in the past ~year. I run into more sites broken by just using Firefox or by ads themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if ublock fixes more sites than it breaks.
Post reply on HN