351–360 of 365 posts
Best part for me: Users were led to believe they were encrypted. They were not. @MikeIsaac Google knew users were mislead. See quotes: >>
Wow, I was sure they were encrypted. I just checked and encryption is turned off by default. I just turned it on, thanks for the heads up.
Wow. We've just had a thread on how Facebook chooses profits over people ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28955579 ) and here's Google complaining that FB "at times" doesn't choose profit... > Google was frustrated @Facebook was not aligning with it to reduce users’ privacy. “We’ve had difficulty getting FB to align on our privacy goals and strategy, as they have at time[s] prioritized winning on reputation ove…
Personally, I don’t care that FB puts profits over people. That’s what I expect. They are a public corporation. FB’s board has a legal obligation (fiduciary responsibility) to make money for shareholders. Capitalism may suck, but it’s the law. Speaking of the law, Google’s abuses listed in this thread are what gall me. In Gulliver’s travels, the Lilliputians don’t strongly punish a common thief. You can just build a…
The biggest findings in this thread are (for me) these two: - gTrade and Bernanke program - WhatsApp backups not encrypted on Drive
My guess is that it was included in the complaint doc for the name and picture of helicopter Ben, because if it ever goes to trial it will turn out to be on par with the "orwellian" point 34.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it's also fragile; that fee might not turn out to be sustainable.
How come? Also they already have a dominant position, producer licensing can go a long way. Nobody is gonna make Android suddenly irrelevant in the next 10 years.
Additionally, google works as a gatekeeper now because handset makers kind of need googles blessing. But android is open source, and potentially forkable. What really keeps handset makers onboard are the google services. But... if you split google, are those handset makers really going to feel as beholden to the android play store if they can get all major apps to run on an alternate store (already the case), and can get access to essentially all google apps without giving the android store any cut (after all, those aren't part of a single "google" bundle anymore then!)
I suspect the 30% cut would have to go; that super-high margin is really a bit of rent-seeking behavior even today, and only sustainable due to Google's overall market position. It's so high that the case could be made that e.g. Samsung's efforts to duplicate it is merited solely as a form of negotiating leverage, rather than as an actual alternative today. Without the whole consumer lock-in and bundle deal that google provides today, androids value proposition is much, much weaker; they could simply offer additional stores with better pricing, and wait for android to come begging for scraps.
Android the platform is certainly here to stay for a while, but as a business unit, assuming it were split from the rest of google? I'm less certain. I mean, I wouldn't count them out, but there are definitely competitors around that would gladly eat their lunch, and might actually succeed then too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unionize anywhere you work. That's the way not to feel bad.
As much as I like unions, I don't think that they prevent companies from doing bad things to the public, just to their employees.
As shown in the recent leaks people have stepped in and tried to stop the shit that's happening.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So the only real way to solve it is robust regulation and good channels for whistleblowers. And probably some sort of minimal unconditional financial security denying corporations to practically take people hostage.
Decoupling health insurance contracts from employment is absolutely necessary, though not sufficient. Do it like the UK, do it like Germany, or do something else, but as long as the health insurance contract itself (not just the payment of some or all of it) is through one’s employer, a lot of otherwise financially stable people in the US are utterly at their employers’ mercy.
https://michael-hudson.com/2016/03/traumatized-worker-syndro...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone needs time to grow up. I too started out thinking it was all so simple and the "free market" would take care of everything etc. Then your world view grows. Your list of "known unknowns" dwarfs your list of knowns. You become more pragmatic. It is clear to me now that some level of top-down coordination is necessary for success. Even national-level coordination is not going to be enough, though. It now needs…
Free market is still a good idea, it's just not enough. What's missing is that we somehow need to ensure all market actors are at most 2-3 orders of magnitude in size/power of each other. Google (and other FAANG type companies) are becoming comfortable in power to whole states. The "free" market just becomes a tyranny of the powerful in this situation.
Ugh, comparable, not comfortable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems most small publishers just put the Adsense code on their website. Is that equivalent with using GAM?
Just putting the Adsense code on a website is what a hobbyist who's making a few bucks/month would do, not someone who is running a business or making a living from their service. It makes sense that the case is not focused on this group, the extremely low-end/hobbyist range of ads is not really the same ecosystem and is not remotely as important.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just putting the Adsense code on a website is what a hobbyist who's making a few bucks/month would do, not someone who is running a business or making a living from their service. It makes sense that the case is not focused on this group, the extremely low-end/hobbyist range of ads is not really the same ecosystem and is not remotely as important.
Really? I know people making a living by running one or multiple sites with adsense on it. What would you tell them they should do instead?
Reseller approach:
Partner with a reseller that gives the publisher access to the reseller's own AdX and header bidding with a 15% or lower cut. Preferably a Google certified partner. A good reseller will work with the publisher to continually optimize/improve.
Independent approach:
Sign up for GAM, setup AdSense within GAM (via line items) so that other ad units can compete via dynamic allocation.
Setup header bidding (prebid.js) on their site. Contact all of the companies (Appnexus, Index Exchange, etc) and try to get partnerships. Requires technical competence, but they can hire someone to do this part if needed.
Header bidding will compete in real-time with AdSense and boost revenue. You can also supplement it with other non-display units (video, floating ad units, etc) from other companies specialized in those areas.
Once traffic is high enough, they should be invited to join AdX instead of AdSense.
Would strongly recommend beginning with the reseller approach, as there a lot of things you need to do properly to ensure you're not shooting yourself in the foot, and they can help you learn.
A good resource is the /r/adops subreddit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have a functioning government, it just so happens to hate us and let companies accrue trillions of dollars without social recompense.
Or, differently put: "In a democracy people get the leaders they deserve."