Live data from Hacker News

De-googling, so far

blog.nradk.com

131–140 of 197 posts

Re: De-googling, so far

#131
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it crazy that someone will say "I still consume it more than any other type of video media" but somehow just paying for it isn't an option. You can pay to make YT ads go away. And the payments go to the video creators (eventually).

Paying won't make Shorts go away. Nor will it remove the 8 other elements of the YouTube UI I have to block to make the site somewhat useable. Also I believe the payouts are split entirely by watchtime. Three minutes of watching an original song with a high-quality music video is worth more to me than 8 hours of some game stream or rambling video essay I happened to have on in the background while doing chores, but i…

How should they split the money then? By time seems the fairest way. How else should they judge the quality? That music video you mentioned is likely to get more views so more money overall. But if the gamer stream is getting more views and watch time why shouldn't it get more money?

Re: De-googling, so far

#132
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simple. Google is in the business of collecting and monetizing my data and removing my privacy. I want them to have as little access to my life as possible.

Day to day what does "monetizing my data and removing my privacy" actually mean to you? Are advertisers following you around town? Bothering you at work? Hounding you in the loo? Personally it seems like my data has been stolen from just about every company I've ever given it to EXCEPT for Google.

> Are advertisers following you around town?

Yes

> Bothering you at work?

Yes

> Hounding you in the loo?

If I'm taking a shit and open my phone. But also, sometimes at the urinal. I mean they put ads right in front of your face.

> Personally it seems like my data has been stolen from just about every company I've ever given it to EXCEPT for Google.

Google isn't in the business of selling ads, they are in the business of selling data. To make those ads more pervasive, targeted, and effective. A good ad goes unnoticed, it is often "native."

But to me, I just think about it this way. If some dude was following me around and writing down everything I do (maybe no the exact content of my words, but who I talk to, when, where I go, etc -- metadata), I'd be fucking pissed and call law enforcement for stalking. Now I don't understand why this is okay if the dude's name is Mark, Sundar, or Satya. I don't care that they're really good at hiding and that their note taking often goes unnoticed. I think it is creepy and immoral behavior.

And beyond that, I know what that data can do. Yes, it can be used to make a lot of useful things. I work in ML, data is POWERFUL. But a coin is a coin, and it can be spent on good things or bad things. Hell, there are even good ads. But the truth of the matter is that there are far too many abuses. More than I think is acceptable. I worry about growing abuse and the slow boiling of a frog[0]. The temperature (both metaphorical and literal) has risen all my life, I see no reason to think that it will cool down if we just continue business as usual. Each little instance of temperature rise may be small and not uncomfortable, but that doesn't mean that given enough time the temperature doesn't rise to a deadly point. I cannot stress this enough, "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." Evil is not (exclusively) created by evil men doing evil things. Evil is more often created by good men with good intentions. It is because the world is complex and because what we build and what we create takes on a life of its own, outside our hands, and outside what we imagined it could/would do. Ethan Zuckerman is not an evil man for creating something so universally hated, and he even created it with good intentions. But this is just the nature of the world and it means to be vigilant and careful. To be clear, it does not mean to stop progressing. But it does mean to be aware that the environment changes and that it is easy to get off track.

It's easy to point fingers at specific people, but I think it is more important to recognize the complexity of reality. Because if that isn't considered, you just create a vacuum for the same evil/abuse to rise again. And again, often by people who have no malintent. And that's the issue: the world is too fucking complex and we want it to be simple(er) and we will often try to bend over backwards to make it so, because we humans were not designed for this. But we are capable of processing it. So, will we?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

Re: De-googling, so far

#133
post #77

For me the point of de-googling is not to literally stop using every single Google service but to disengage enough that your entire online identity isn't tied to Google such that losing your account would be catastrophic. For example, I still have a gmail account I use for lots of random things, but critical bank/financial accounts go directly to a separate fastmail address (where I am confident I could get a human t…

Simple. Google is in the business of collecting and monetizing my data and removing my privacy. I want them to have as little access to my life as possible.

They are in a business of showing you ads. Showing your private data to someone is not in their interest.

Re: De-googling, so far

#134
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not inherently a money pit. Google and Facebook have a complete oligopoly over the ads market and are manipulating it so nobody else can prosper.

Serving video data to, potentially, billions of users is absolutely expensive. You can't, "in a weekend" a youtube clone that can stand up to the first viral hit.

That's what BitTorrent is for. The main issue with torrenting is that non-viral content is going to have very low availability.

Re: De-googling, so far

#135
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Day to day what does "monetizing my data and removing my privacy" actually mean to you? Are advertisers following you around town? Bothering you at work? Hounding you in the loo? Personally it seems like my data has been stolen from just about every company I've ever given it to EXCEPT for Google.

>Day to day what does "monetizing my data and removing my privacy" actually mean to you? Are advertisers following you around town? Bothering you at work? Hounding you in the loo? They are doing all of those things if you have your phone with you! Unless you manually go about disabling notifications, turning off gps access for all apps, etc.

They do all these things even if you don't. Even if you don't have a google account. The degree in which they do is higher if you do, but that doesn't remove it, it just lessens it.

And it is worth noting that even turning off your GPS, you can still be followed. The very nature of how cell service works requires the ability to locate you, even if not to the same precision level (as aforementioned).

There are of course trade-offs and this nature does not mean the tech is bad. But it does mean that we need to be aware of how it is used and how it can be abused. It is okay for mistakes to happen, but we need to fix them and resolve them, not ignore them or underplay them. My larger fear is that we live in a cluttered house and all these conversations end up being "well that piece of paper on the ground isn't that bad. That doesn't mean I'm messy." Because that is true. But there's a million instances of that and the accumulation is what creates the messy/cluttered house, not any singular piece of trash. If we can't see the forest from the trees, we're doomed. Because most of the problems that exist in our modern world are through these larger complex chains of coupled interactions. Where singular events are not that bad, but the system is.

Re: De-googling, so far

#136
post #83
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t mind ads in the videos for creators I enjoy, it pays their bills. There’s a difference between those and YouTube’s ads which the creators don’t get a big percentage of. I can easily fast forward those ads if I want to, anyways. How do you expect all this content to be made without any sort of money? You’re basically leeching off the rest of us, in this case, IMO. I hate ads, but right now that’s the only tick…

The creators get the majority of the ad revenue from YouTube's ads (it's a 55/45 split).

55% isn’t big to be when you consider they made the content, though the cost’s for video are probably higher than most things online.

Re: De-googling, so far

#137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simple. Google is in the business of collecting and monetizing my data and removing my privacy. I want them to have as little access to my life as possible.

They are in a business of showing you ads. Showing your private data to someone is not in their interest.

> Showing your private data to someone is not in their interest.

Showing your private data to someone is not in their interest yet

Re: De-googling, so far

#138
post #70
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t mind ads in the videos for creators I enjoy, it pays their bills. There’s a difference between those and YouTube’s ads which the creators don’t get a big percentage of. I can easily fast forward those ads if I want to, anyways. How do you expect all this content to be made without any sort of money? You’re basically leeching off the rest of us, in this case, IMO. I hate ads, but right now that’s the only tick…

I mind all ads. They rob you of your most precious and nonrenewable resource without consent. Ads are cancer and should be excised at every opportunity. Ad companies should be destroyed. Ad tech workers should be blackballed. Shilling is shameful.

I’ll agree in some capacity that ads are a scourge today, but what’s your alternative? You can’t just burn down the world ave start fresh, there has to be a better way and a plan to transition. Those who would just burn the world down are not mature. This applies to just parts of the world, too, such as “advertising must burn” or “let Y country burn because of X problem” (paraphrasing).

I cannot agree on blackballing workers. That’s just another form of control we shouldn’t exercise. Imagine if someone blackballed you for your career doing whatever you do? They’re just trying to survive and earn a living. Maybe I’ll agree on shaming and calling out execs though.

Re: De-googling, so far

#139
I'm mostly degoogled myself, and disable/firewall every Google app on my device. Pretty hard to switch away from GMail as it's essentially everywhere for me, and YouTube doesn't have a viable replacement. I use 3rd party apps for both though, as well as the store. Re the store, I endured doing manual updates weekly for several years. Then recently when I upgraded my device I discovered Shizuku (allows elevated access without rooting), which connects nicely with Aurora Store and handles the installs. It's like a huge breath of fresh air.

Re: De-googling, so far

#140
It really takes effort to scrub oneself of big-tech. I don’t know how non-HN-types are supposed to do it.

My weak point has been Apple Photos. It “just works” for me and I really appreciate that it does all processing for faces, cats, etc. locally and in a native app. Every other option I find either doesn’t do syncing, offers an Electron app, or forces viewing through a browser.

Does anyone know of a solution that fits the bill? I will happily self-host.

Post reply on HN