The grand old enshittification curve strikes again. Remember, as stated by Cory Doctorow, the process of enshittification entails these steps: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse t…
Not this one. Collecting data and serving ads is their core business. They cancel and change products that enable the core, but never the gist of their business.
Could I buy a windows 11 machine with a TPM 2 compatible motherboard and compiled my own web server that gave away valid WEI tokens such that other users could present them for fake legitimacy?
Does the token also contain a tracker that uniquely identifies my motherboard? (And therefore me, and by design of the protocol, serves to every one?)
Google never stood for anything other than making as much money as possible. Sergio Brin and Larry Page only coined the whole “Don’t be Evil” shtick to fool people into thinking they had more privacy with Google than with Microsoft’s Bing search engine. Neither were any kind of moralist.
That’s because Google is on the far side of the track that tech companies follow.
They start out as people passionate about what they are doing. As those people leave they tend to replaced by spreadsheet readers that only have a passion for personal gain.
For me the majority of my usage will go nicely with firefox. None of the streaming apps or services I use require DRM, because they are piracy sites. I don’t give a damn about pirating. Only if it is implemented then some banking services I use or food delivery service gonna use this. Which I don’t mind using chrome for. All others will be done through firefox. We can’t do anything against all these. So find some loop holes in the coming times to make it in our favor.
We nonetheless recognize that some of Google’s algorithm and design changes resulted
in the demotion of websites that could, collectively, be considered threats to Google’s search
business… On the other hand, these changes to Google’s search algorithm could reasonably be
viewed as improving the overall quality of Google’s search results because the first search page
now presented the user with a greater diversity of websites.
Rather, we conclude that Google’s display of its own content could plausibly be viewed as an improvement
in the overall quality of Google’s search product
Yeah. FTC is going to do jack-crap about the situation given the tools that they currently have. The FTC is on purpose weak, the US Congress has sought to weaken it over the last three decades. People can go leave a comment on the FTC’s website, but don’t forget, US citizens, to stop by the House and the Senate. And if you need some background, here and here.
Now all that said, this isn’t posted to discourage, it’s posted to get you focused on what hinders the FTC.
I still need to get my head around what Google is doing and what the effects are, as previous experience says making reports to regulators tends to be more effective when I explain exactly what I’m complaining about. I once got the Solicitors Regulatory Authority (UK) to investigate a firm that was abusing process; after hundreds of complaints from hundreds of people, mine was the complaint they acted on (and I was the only person who got any updates on their investigation.) The right wording matters!
So once I’m sure I fully understand what I’m complaining about, off to the CMA I will go.
I think to become what we can as a species, one big decision must be „if don‘t be evil conflicts with profits, then maybe your company should review their income streams“
Even then, “Don’t be evil” literally only ever covered “Don’t put ads before real search results” which was obviously tossed out the fucking window nearly a decade ago.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !technology@beehaw.org
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Luckily it’s Google. They’ll release it, half arse it for two years then cancel it without warning.
Ha. Never a truer summary of Google’s competence in anything other than spamming adverts at you.
But this serves that core competence of spamming adverts at you
I’d say that depends on how profitable it is - services like AdSense and gmail are still going strong some 20 years after being introduced!
Not this one. Collecting data and serving ads is their core business. They cancel and change products that enable the core, but never the gist of their business.
Will have to see…
Hopefully…
— Harvey Dent
It goes against everything Google Said it stood for.
Google has been like this from the start.
Could I buy a windows 11 machine with a TPM 2 compatible motherboard and compiled my own web server that gave away valid WEI tokens such that other users could present them for fake legitimacy?
Does the token also contain a tracker that uniquely identifies my motherboard? (And therefore me, and by design of the protocol, serves to every one?)
Google never stood for anything other than making as much money as possible. Sergio Brin and Larry Page only coined the whole “Don’t be Evil” shtick to fool people into thinking they had more privacy with Google than with Microsoft’s Bing search engine. Neither were any kind of moralist.
That’s because Google is on the far side of the track that tech companies follow.
They start out as people passionate about what they are doing. As those people leave they tend to replaced by spreadsheet readers that only have a passion for personal gain.
Fire fox, Fire fox;
Fuck you Google;
We’re throwing rocks.
Alpha bet, Alpha bet;
Farming data is,
stalking/theft.
Everything Google once claimed to stand for.
Everything Google is doing now is against what it once stood for.
“to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.”
“to display the most profitable advertisement even if it contains misinformation”
“do no evil”
DELETED
“against authoritarian government censorship”
“let’s try to develop a censored search engine for China”
and many more…
For me the majority of my usage will go nicely with firefox. None of the streaming apps or services I use require DRM, because they are piracy sites. I don’t give a damn about pirating. Only if it is implemented then some banking services I use or food delivery service gonna use this. Which I don’t mind using chrome for. All others will be done through firefox. We can’t do anything against all these. So find some loop holes in the coming times to make it in our favor.
If you oppose this, don’t just comment and complain, contact your antitrust authority today:
US:
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/report-antitrust-violation
antitrust@ftc.gov
EU:
https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/antitrust/contact_en
comp-greffe-antitrust@ec.europa.eu
UK:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tell-the-cma-about-a-competition-or-market-problem
general.enquiries@cma.gov.uk
France:
https://signal.conso.gouv.fr/fr/tel-internet-media/faire-un-signalement
Germany: @kartellamt@social.bund.de (anti-cartel bureau) of @BMWK https://www.bundeskartellamt.de/DE/Kartellverbot/Anonyme_Hinweise/anonymehinweise_node.html https://www.bundeskartellamt.de/DE/Missbrauchsaufsicht/missbrauchsaufsicht_node.html
Philippines:
https://www.phcc.gov.ph/file-a-complaint/
enforcement@phcc.gov.ph
India:
https://www.cci.gov.in/antitrust/
https://www.cci.gov.in/filing/atd
Canada:
https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/frm-eng/GHÉT-7TDNA5
Done. Thanks for mentioning this.
US FTC’s statement about Google and antitrust investigation back in 2013.
Yeah. FTC is going to do jack-crap about the situation given the tools that they currently have. The FTC is on purpose weak, the US Congress has sought to weaken it over the last three decades. People can go leave a comment on the FTC’s website, but don’t forget, US citizens, to stop by the House and the Senate. And if you need some background, here and here.
Now all that said, this isn’t posted to discourage, it’s posted to get you focused on what hinders the FTC.
Reporting it is a great idea.
I still need to get my head around what Google is doing and what the effects are, as previous experience says making reports to regulators tends to be more effective when I explain exactly what I’m complaining about. I once got the Solicitors Regulatory Authority (UK) to investigate a firm that was abusing process; after hundreds of complaints from hundreds of people, mine was the complaint they acted on (and I was the only person who got any updates on their investigation.) The right wording matters!
So once I’m sure I fully understand what I’m complaining about, off to the CMA I will go.
When “Don’t be evil” conflicts with profits then “Don’t be evil” gotta go.
I think to become what we can as a species, one big decision must be „if don‘t be evil conflicts with profits, then maybe your company should review their income streams“
Google be like:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yuL6PcgSgM
Everything google touches turns to shit. Unfortunately they have ideas about owning the web and I cannot tell them to fuck off hard enough
Goes against what they “said” they stood for, but never really took it seriously.
See: Literally every company ever.
Yep!
I mean… they dropped hte “dont be evil” tag, ages ago… which heralded the next phase of Google… “we are for sure going to be doing evil.”
Even then, “Don’t be evil” literally only ever covered “Don’t put ads before real search results” which was obviously tossed out the fucking window nearly a decade ago.
https://librex.devol.it/
Search results like it should be.