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

Why we're saying no to Google

blog.ecosia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 92 posts

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#71

Post by ikeyany »

ryacko wrote: post #36
ikeyany wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, Project Fi is pretty awesome. There are so many industries they've disrupted for the better. They're certainly not as innocent as they were in the past, but they're getting a lot of disproportionate hate right now.

Google would have been better off with a decentralized solution subsidizing WISPs, than trying to build out fiber infrastructure using contractors. Google wants to be a vertical monopoly, which is a massive coordination problem.

Project Fi (the cell service provider, though I think it's just called Google Fi) is a very different entity than Google Fiber.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#72

Post by Nasrudith »

stcredzero wrote: post #7
joelx wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ongoing attacks on Google are crazy to me. Google has done wonders for all of us - remember how terrible search engines used to be? Do you remember how terrible email was before Gmail? How awful MapQuest was before Google maps? In my opinion these attacks are a paid PR driven distraction from the truly evil actors in the world - see the losses of freedom for people in Hong Kong or citizens of Russia who been impr…

Do you remember how terrible email was before Gmail? How awful MapQuest was before Google maps? Those aren't the reason why some people are down on Google. The damage that they're doing to the public discourse is one of the things that concerns people.

That is a very strange charge against a search engine - frankly it sounds like the sort of thing that would get the same jury which sentenced Socrates to hemlock to cry bullshit.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#73

Post by ppseafield »

cameronbrown wrote: post #68
wartijn_ wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe option 6: Don't have a search app by default? I don't see why such an app is required. If user need to search for something, they can use their browser. And if someone wants to have a browser app/widget they can download it from the Play store. This "solution" by Google is just a way to prevent more fines, while most people will still have a huge Google search bar on their phone and Google can make some extra m…

Then who chooses which browser is Android's default? And which search engine is the browser's default? You've just shifted the problem down the stack.

The EU had a solution for that when Microsoft was doing the same thing with browsers: post install offer the user a choice of web browsers, which IIRC was based on market share.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#74

Post by slackfan »

joelx wrote: post #6
chupa-chups wrote: post #2

This sounds like 'I want money by being "not google" and thus people have to like me'. The linked website doesn't point to anything else but that they're allegedly planting trees for (an unknown percentage of the money collected by) showing ads to users. Which is nice, but if you want that I support tree planting initiatives explicitly (which I do), why don't you just encourage someone doing just that, maybe by point…

The ongoing attacks on Google are crazy to me. Google has done wonders for all of us - remember how terrible search engines used to be? Do you remember how terrible email was before Gmail? How awful MapQuest was before Google maps? In my opinion these attacks are a paid PR driven distraction from the truly evil actors in the world - see the losses of freedom for people in Hong Kong or citizens of Russia who been impr…

The thing is, none of those things were terrible at all.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#75

Post by joelx »

stiray wrote: post #38
joelx wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ongoing attacks on Google are crazy to me. Google has done wonders for all of us - remember how terrible search engines used to be? Do you remember how terrible email was before Gmail? How awful MapQuest was before Google maps? In my opinion these attacks are a paid PR driven distraction from the truly evil actors in the world - see the losses of freedom for people in Hong Kong or citizens of Russia who been impr…

The competition was what made those services better. Now there is situation where is almost no competition. Which is killing the possibility to get even better services. Google has gone its way to the mega corporation where nothing else matters but money. And they are moving into direction where this money is comming from worse possible sources. Regarding "true evil", to some people google IS true evil. And based of…

True evil is MBS ordering the murder of journalist Khasshogi. True evil is invading and conquering Crimea. True evil is murdering your generals with anti-aircraft guns or watching dogs tear them apart while still alive.

Serving banner ads across sites does not even remotely compare.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#76

Post by stcredzero »

Nasrudith wrote: post #72
stcredzero wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you remember how terrible email was before Gmail? How awful MapQuest was before Google maps? Those aren't the reason why some people are down on Google. The damage that they're doing to the public discourse is one of the things that concerns people.

That is a very strange charge against a search engine - frankly it sounds like the sort of thing that would get the same jury which sentenced Socrates to hemlock to cry bullshit.

Socrates was saying things people didn't like. Google is hiding things they don't like, and trying to make it seem like people like other things more.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#77

Post by Nasrudith »

stcredzero wrote: post #76
Nasrudith wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a very strange charge against a search engine - frankly it sounds like the sort of thing that would get the same jury which sentenced Socrates to hemlock to cry bullshit.

Socrates was saying things people didn't like. Google is hiding things they don't like, and trying to make it seem like people like other things more.

Ah that charge - not liking that their bubble isn't universal and declaring "No it is the children that are wrong and declaring Google is rigged against them.

Blaming them for the state of society is sheer scapegoating as frankly society can and has fucked itself up far more without any outside involvement. It is like accusing rock music of making teenagers rebellous when it is really the result of development of agency,nand finding the framework they are under constraining, and discontent with choices made for them.

They get shit no matter what they do directionality. If they let algorithms guide it pure they are "promoting radicalization" by trying to serve the user with engagement. If they hide disturbing suggested searched they are "censorsing". The true purpose isn't to be satisfied but to try to bully for control.

The whole damn point of a search engine is to prioritize.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#78

Post by shyneeup »

ppseafield wrote: post #73
cameronbrown wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then who chooses which browser is Android's default? And which search engine is the browser's default? You've just shifted the problem down the stack.

The EU had a solution for that when Microsoft was doing the same thing with browsers: post install offer the user a choice of web browsers, which IIRC was based on market share.

are you advocating for the same solution here with search engines...? Because that would just give the same result.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#80

Post by stcredzero »

Nasrudith wrote: post #77
stcredzero wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Socrates was saying things people didn't like. Google is hiding things they don't like, and trying to make it seem like people like other things more.

Ah that charge - not liking that their bubble isn't universal and declaring "No it is the children that are wrong and declaring Google is rigged against them. Blaming them for the state of society is sheer scapegoating as frankly society can and has fucked itself up far more without any outside involvement. It is like accusing rock music of making teenagers rebellous when it is really the result of development of age…

declaring "No it is the children that are wrong and declaring Google is rigged against them."

The kids are alright. There are Google whistle-blowers coming forward to about Google's manipulation, and there are internal documents corroborating this.

It is like accusing rock music of making teenagers rebellious when it is really the result of development of agency

No, it's like calling out the media trying to push that narrative.

The true purpose isn't to be satisfied but to try to bully for control.

Bingo! So the solution is just to let people have their speech.

The whole damn point of a search engine is to prioritize.

When it helps things go viral that people want to see, this is being done correctly. When it's pushing an agenda, even though what's being pushed doesn't have traction, for the sake of ad dollars, and to prop up dying industries, then this is corruption.

Post reply on HN