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

De-Googleify Internet

degooglisons-internet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 266 posts

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#41

Post by cookiecaper »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #27

> These services track us everywhere, while claiming to give us a better “user experience”. That's kind of the problem though; they usually _do_ offer a better user experience. If we want users to start using open source software rather than walled garden solutions from large companies, we're going to have to start building open source solutions which offer a comparable user experience to proprietary ones from large…

The most crucial thing for the future of information freedom is to fix American intellectual property and network access laws.

"Walled gardens" exist because anyone who effectively frees a user's data on the user's terms is at least sued, if not jailed, under statutes like the Soviet-era, pre-Internet Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and luddite interpretations of the Copyright Act that consider a RAM copy that exists for milliseconds an infringement.

Allow coders to make it easy to cart your data around and suddenly the major tech incumbents will have to compete on merit instead of merely holding your data hostage, which is exactly what they don't want. The powerful make laws to prevent others from challenging their power.

If we update copyright and the CFAA to address conventional internet use (from the user's perspective, not the corporate giants who were quick to legislate themselves a safe harbor with the DMCA) and constrain the scope of browsewrap and clickwrap agreements to reasonable liability disclaimers, we'll have no problem maintaining a vibrant and accessible marketplace for user-facing services.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#42

Post by oliv__ »

It's unfortunate that it comes down to this but... maybe people will use an alternative to Google when it stops looking like this: https://framadate.org/images/date.png

Unfortunately for these projects, user experience is pretty much everything. Yes people care about privacy, but obviously not enough to have to use lesser products.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#43

Post by ma2rten »

mwfunk wrote: post #37
mi100hael wrote: post #12

I like the idea of this project, but I have several nits/concerns: - De-Google-ify is a poor way of marketing these ideas. Your average web user loves Google because they are trendy and make everything so convenient. - The site enumerates the pitfalls of cloud-hosted solutions and then proceeds to link to their own cloud-hosted solutions with no explanation of why they're any safer, better, etc. And not limited to th…

I've long felt that RMS/FSF's very specific and nonintuitive usage of "free" was intended to be misleading. If someone says "free" (which has many, many different meanings, all positive) when they really mean "copyleft" (which has one very complicated meaning), they're not trying to clarify anything, rather they're trying to muddy the waters so that people who don't understand copyleft or the FSF's political philosop…

By RMS? Why would he make his message intentionally less clear?

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#44

Post by dao- »

> The increasingly centralized online services provided by sprawling giants like Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, or Microsoft (GAFAM) pose a threat to our digital lives.

Curious that they don't talk about browsers. Your browser sees everything and knows everything it wants to know about your online life, it's arguably the most sensitive piece of the puzzle. All major browsers except Firefox are owned by "GAFAM."

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#45

Post by rm_-rf_slash »

mwfunk wrote: post #37
mi100hael wrote: post #12

I like the idea of this project, but I have several nits/concerns: - De-Google-ify is a poor way of marketing these ideas. Your average web user loves Google because they are trendy and make everything so convenient. - The site enumerates the pitfalls of cloud-hosted solutions and then proceeds to link to their own cloud-hosted solutions with no explanation of why they're any safer, better, etc. And not limited to th…

I've long felt that RMS/FSF's very specific and nonintuitive usage of "free" was intended to be misleading. If someone says "free" (which has many, many different meanings, all positive) when they really mean "copyleft" (which has one very complicated meaning), they're not trying to clarify anything, rather they're trying to muddy the waters so that people who don't understand copyleft or the FSF's political philosop…

My usual goto about "free" software and "free" service:

"Free speech is not the same as free beer."

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#46

Post by setq »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #11
ebbv wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't DuckDuckGo Bing behind the scenes, though? That doesn't seem that much better to me. It would be nice to have a truly independent, startup search engine but it's a really big task for a fresh company to tackle.

The major advantage DDG has is that it doesn't matter what it is behind the scenes. They can change whenever it suits them and the site will continue to act as an anonymizing front-end, complete with some useful extras.

This. I find DDG is the vim of search engines. Small learning curve but immensely powerful.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#47

Post by eikenberry »

eterm wrote: post #7
nvk wrote: post #3

Just talking about search alternative; DuckDuckGo is my default search engine for over 2 years. It's incredibly good, the only caveat is you need to re-learn how to search. The same way you "changed yourself" initially for google.

Except google didn't need learning, in fact that's part of what made it so much more powerful, they early on dropped support for AND and OR and other boolean keywords which other search engines required to get good results. In fact one of google's early "hidden" successful features was using implicit AND not implicit OR, which had been the de-facto on other search engines, so searching for "gold plates" on other sear…

Teaching a child to use Google will show you that there is indeed quite a learning curve. It is not intuitive how you evaluate your results and refine your search to get good results.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#48

Post by prplhaz4 »

techsupporter wrote: post #19
PascLeRasc wrote: post #9

Why? To completely remove anything from your life that happens to have Google as a part of it would be so inconvenient. Gmail is objectively an amazing email app on both desktop browser and mobile. No search engine can come close to Google. Lots of great apps like Google Docs, Calendar, and Translate exist to make your life easier for free. Google Maps is kinda annoying with Uber ads but its navigation and UI is so n…

> To completely remove anything from your life that happens to have Google as a part of it would be so inconvenient. How so? I don't use any Google services (even search) and don't feel the least bit inconvenienced. Microsoft's suite has those same things (Excel, Word, and OneNote are all available through a web page if that's your thing), translations are widely available (Bing and Dictionary.com), alternative maps…

I'd say the "better-ness" of Google services these days is strictly the fact that everyone already uses them (which is critical for something like instant messaging). Individually they are (IMO) no better than most alternatives. Unless I'm real serious about a certain tool, the one I already have is the one I'm likely to start using - and most of the adult internet right now probably already has a Google account - and I'm pretty sure the kids are still signing up w/them, so no end in sight here...

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#49

Post by syphilis2 »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #27

> These services track us everywhere, while claiming to give us a better “user experience”. That's kind of the problem though; they usually _do_ offer a better user experience. If we want users to start using open source software rather than walled garden solutions from large companies, we're going to have to start building open source solutions which offer a comparable user experience to proprietary ones from large…

I believe this is true. But I also have found that sometimes the user experience is diminished when not "logged in" to encourage people to create accounts. Pinterest has a box that slowly covers up more of the screen as you scroll drown. Facebook has a login prompt box that stays at the bottom of the screen and occasionally expands as a reminder. Quora prevents internal redirects to new pages. With enough know-how these can be worked around but it is an effort and I often find myself making the undesirable choice between doing the work around, ignoring the content, or signing up for an account.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#50

Post by mjevans »

mwfunk wrote: post #37
mi100hael wrote: post #12

I like the idea of this project, but I have several nits/concerns: - De-Google-ify is a poor way of marketing these ideas. Your average web user loves Google because they are trendy and make everything so convenient. - The site enumerates the pitfalls of cloud-hosted solutions and then proceeds to link to their own cloud-hosted solutions with no explanation of why they're any safer, better, etc. And not limited to th…

I've long felt that RMS/FSF's very specific and nonintuitive usage of "free" was intended to be misleading. If someone says "free" (which has many, many different meanings, all positive) when they really mean "copyleft" (which has one very complicated meaning), they're not trying to clarify anything, rather they're trying to muddy the waters so that people who don't understand copyleft or the FSF's political philosop…

It's less confusing when you focus on the 'freedom of the users'.

Maybe that's the part of the message that's been most lost over the years. Focusing so much on free/libre that the group to which it applies (everyone (else), end users) is forgotten.

Freedom for the users is the empowerment to treat ideas and expressions of ideas as simply that. A restoration to the laws of nature which make the cost of copying an idea merely seeing it in action.

Yes, that brings hard questions to the table as well. However my answer to those is mostly that works covered as free/libre software should be public works. Common infrastructure that everyone is supposed to have access to. An open and level playing field for the advancement of education and the useful arts of science. They should also provide a useful platform for more transitory productions like games and videos.

Post reply on HN