431–440 of 550 posts
The article starts, "Nestled in the hills of Mountain View", which is worrisome, because as anyone with even a passing familiarity with Silicon Valley geography knows, Mountain View is mostly flat. And Google's Mountain View offices are located on reclaimed baylands, which are especially flat. I wonder if the article authors were thinking of Xerox PARC's offices in Palo Alto's hills? Or the road named "Sand Hill Road…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Economist is British so it's possible the person writing this has never been to the Bay Area and just made a wordplay based on "Mountain View".
Journalists writing bullshit straight out of their asses is certainly nothing new in this day and age.
It is depressing that people dont recognize that Google has invented and perfected a parasitic business model that has destroyed the internet (and much of tech with it) and this episode feels like just another turn of the downward spiral. The article aims to offer a preliminary analysis of whether Microsoft can become a better parasite: Grabbing the content people generate online, paying nothing, and using it deftly…
In this model, are end users who use it to search for information parasites as well? After all, they are consuming content that other people generate online, and usually pay nothing for it. And they love to look for — and find — what they are interested in. If Google didn't satisfy that need well, people wouldn't have preferred it, and it wouldn't have grown.
Sorry to break it to you folks but if you hated your data being with Google, you are in for a surprise on how atrociously bad Microsoft is at privacy and security. Multiple close friends who have worked at Microsoft tell me that search history data - who is searching what, is basically sitting in systems with ACLs so bad that 20-30K employees have access through transitive membership of groups. To access a customer's…
The monopolistic dominance is the issue. They have too much data and too much power, and leverage that to swallow other market categories. Today they have a deeply unhealthy dominance over the tech industry.
Google could do everything right and still be an existential problem. You say MS has data security issues, okay sure. I’d still rather have them or anyone at 25%+ of the market.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the same Microsoft that had to close down their Twitter AI “Tay” after a single day because it immediately became a “racist asshole” (as per The Verge) in 2016? The same OpenAI ran by Sam Altman, who just last year was part of a crypto biometric scam called “Worldcoin” that attempted to collect biometric data from some of the worlds poorest in exchange for a shitcoin? I’m sure they’ve done their due diligence…
2016 was 7 years ago. And I completely forgot about that incident. And so did everyone else. > I’m sure they’ve done their due diligence and aren’t just pushing out a broken product as quickly as possible after it went viral because they saw dollar signs… Why wouldn't they? If they bet and win, they significantly disrupt the search market and many others. If they don't, people still don't use Bing. The rest of their…
Microsoft also?
> Why wouldn't they? If they bet and win, they significantly disrupt the search market and many others. If they don't, people still don't use Bing. The rest of their business will continue on as is.
The GP was responding to a post that said that Microsoft 100% did their due diligence.... I'm unsure to what you are responding.
It is depressing that people dont recognize that Google has invented and perfected a parasitic business model that has destroyed the internet (and much of tech with it) and this episode feels like just another turn of the downward spiral. The article aims to offer a preliminary analysis of whether Microsoft can become a better parasite: Grabbing the content people generate online, paying nothing, and using it deftly…
The web was hard to navigate and you relied on webpages "befriending" each other and helping you navigate to similar pages. That was real navigation and it had terrible recall. Once google became the Internet's frontend everything was one or two hops away. It was awesome, and I think that it has evolved in a way that saves time with the snippets and knowledge graph panel at the expense of taking away clicks from sites that needed to serve their ads. Although today things are getting worse with walled gardens and SEO.
A problem that the internet has not solved yet is how to keep webpages up while there's increasingly more content. Most sites were maintained at a loss by people, or leeching resources at a university or company. The closest "people" have got to fix this IMO is through P2P, but it got too focused on piracy and got a bad reputation with malware too. And I think we never had the infrastructure to serve and share webpages we visited. Sharing today is still a mess and we still depend on centralized distribution + caching (and that's dying with https, only big companies who are better off giving caching servers away to ISPs can do this).
Ads came to "save" the internet from this problem. I really hate them and I wish we had a better model, but they seem a necessary evil as people just got used to believe that all digital things are free when they obviously cost something, and that still shows today in the apps stores.
It is depressing that people dont recognize that Google has invented and perfected a parasitic business model that has destroyed the internet (and much of tech with it) and this episode feels like just another turn of the downward spiral. The article aims to offer a preliminary analysis of whether Microsoft can become a better parasite: Grabbing the content people generate online, paying nothing, and using it deftly…
> It is depressing that people dont recognize that Google has invented and perfected a parasitic business model ... The article aims to offer a preliminary analysis of whether Microsoft can become a better parasite In this model, are end users who use it to search for information parasites as well? After all, they are consuming content that other people generate online, and usually pay nothing for it. And they love t…
Search should be democratized by governments. It is central and should be for everybody. No control.
It is depressing that people dont recognize that Google has invented and perfected a parasitic business model that has destroyed the internet (and much of tech with it) and this episode feels like just another turn of the downward spiral. The article aims to offer a preliminary analysis of whether Microsoft can become a better parasite: Grabbing the content people generate online, paying nothing, and using it deftly…
It is depressing that people dont recognize that Google has invented and perfected a parasitic business model that has destroyed the internet (and much of tech with it) and this episode feels like just another turn of the downward spiral. The article aims to offer a preliminary analysis of whether Microsoft can become a better parasite: Grabbing the content people generate online, paying nothing, and using it deftly…