Google Posts • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Posts

#111

Post by rayuela » Sat, Mar 05, 2016, 7:41 PM UTC

TillE wrote: post #77

chippy wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can imagine the popular, rich and powerful to love it. Imagine avoiding all the abuse, threats, snide remarks, witty rebuttals, imaginative memes and uncomfortable truths that Twitter gives them as a platform. People want something more sanitized as a platform. It's quite an interesting development.

Isn't that what ads are for? If you want to speak and not listen, just use a traditional broadcast medium like TV.

I think the intended purpose is to blurr that line.

Re: Google Posts

#112

Post by dredmorbius » Sat, Mar 05, 2016, 8:01 PM UTC

Animats wrote: post #21

Does anybody go directly to "google.com" any more? Most search is through the browser's search box.

Mine is through my browser's search box ... which has defaulted to DDG for years.

Re: Google Posts

#113

Post by garrettgrimsley » Sat, Mar 05, 2016, 8:49 PM UTC

ebbv wrote: post #17

Wow, when Google makes this available to businesses they're going to be able to charge whatever they want and every business is going to have to use it. This is not good.

Is that so different than the advertising space that they currently sell? Everyone that has posted screenshots of the new feature is using ad-blocking, so maybe we just don't even think about the ads any more?

[0] http://i.imgur.com/mkTaMJo.png

Re: Google Posts

#114

Post by leppr » Sat, Mar 05, 2016, 10:10 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #109

leppr wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Terrifying? I assume you're living in a constant state of fear then, because television networks already have and use that power. On the contrary I'd say that in this field the more players there are, the better.

> Terrifying? I assume you're living in a constant state of fear then, because television networks already have and use that power. First, there are lots of tv networks. Second, yes, regarding that matter, we SHOULD fear the power of tv networks. I don't even understand the reasoning here: "why do you call Google having curation/censorship power fearsome, since tv networks already have curation/censorship power?". Ob…

The reasoning is simple:

Instead of seeing Google as rising as a new kind of ruler, enforcing a new kind of authority, I think it's more appropriate to see it as grafting itself onto an already existing authority.

So to me it's not clear cut whether the centralizing power Google brings with its resources overweights the decentralizing power from dividing such authority into more parts.

And as an aside it also seems foolish to worry about this when said political system itself guarantees that the majority of the population can't be properly represented unless they agree with each other, which is precisely the problem media control solves.

Re: Google Posts

#115

Post by fwn » Sat, Mar 05, 2016, 11:19 PM UTC

chippy wrote: post #65

hobarrera wrote: post #59

So... Twitter?

without the opposing views, trolls, abuse, other points of view, memes, snide remarks, outrage, support and morsels of truth and without a Safety Council, perhaps, yes like Twitter.

And with the clever twist that behind the "Tweet", there is an actual article. With actual information.

So yes, like Twitter. ..if you only use it to share Medium posts.

Re: Google Posts

#116

Post by ocdtrekkie » Mon, Mar 07, 2016, 5:13 AM UTC

doughj3 wrote: post #54

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoa, I've never seen this privacy reminder box before! Must be an EU-specific thing to try and dissuade them from getting skinned alive by EU privacy laws.

Nope, I see it in the US here.

It's an EU URL though.

Re: Google Posts

#117

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Mar 09, 2016, 1:52 AM UTC

k-mcgrady wrote: post #87

leppr wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Terrifying? I assume you're living in a constant state of fear then, because television networks already have and use that power. On the contrary I'd say that in this field the more players there are, the better.

There are thousands of television channels. As far as most people are concerned, when it comes to search, there is only Google.

[deleted]

Re: Google Posts

#118

Post by gtf21 » Wed, Mar 09, 2016, 1:52 AM UTC

leppr wrote: post #86

gtf21 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The potential for Google to therefore decide who gets to speak, and therefore who doesn't, is terrifying.

Terrifying? I assume you're living in a constant state of fear then, because television networks already have and use that power. On the contrary I'd say that in this field the more players there are, the better.

There's a behavioural difference here. If I don't see someone speak on a TV channel, then I don't assume they don't exist / aren't important. If I search for someone via Google / other search engine, and they don't come up, or their opponents come up far higher in the rankings than they do, then I imagine (without having done any proper studies on this) that it will influence my opinion of them more.

I also don't buy the argument that Google having huge powers of, effectively, no-platforming is any less terrifying because TV channels have had it for a long time. This is just as bad!