You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
0 points

Now I feel they are harvesting all my data to jam ads down my throat.

I’m curious: how did you expect them to pay for the overhead of providing this service? I’m sure you didn’t think that they would just eat the cost of providing it forever, right?

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Not that I disagree, but this is a shit take IMHO. It’s always been the case that ads paid for “free” services, but the scale and invasiveness of the ads and data collection has clearly accelerated beyond a reasonable level. They waited until they captured a large enough user base and crowded out enough of their competition before gouging their users for ad revenue. They have the size and reach of a small(or medium-sized, even) nation, the data they are able to collect is a wet dream for any three letter agency.

Just because ads are what make the business model feasible doesn’t mean they get a free pass to abuse their market position carte blanche. They should be cut down to size, and not just by user migration.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

but the scale and invasiveness of the ads and data collection has clearly accelerated beyond a reasonable level

Reasonable to whom? You? Google? The legal system? Some dude living in a bunker in South Dakota? Which person or entity should google consult with before making a decision on what level is “reasonable”?

Making the decision to fund a vast majority of the internet with ads was a pretty big mistake in hindsight, though I couldn’t say which way would have been better.

We don’t disagree on the basics; I just don’t blame a company for acting in the company’s best financial interests. That’s kind of the way they work-- arguably the CEO of a public company is bound by law to do so. I blame the representatives in the (US) government for failing to protect my interests and privacy. I frequently see news articles about consumer protections in Europe and feel jealous that we don’t have the same level here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I blame the representatives in the (US) government for failing to protect my interests and privacy.

I think that thinking is part of the problem. Why don’t people take responsibility for their lives and stop using abusive services? Almost everyone knows Google spies and abuses people’s info, but they are too lazy to change or don’t care cuz they like free shit. So I say let them stay and get abused. Those who care move on - like we did here from another abuser in Reddit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

I blame the representatives in the (US) government for failing to protect my interests and privacy.

If a (at this time fictional, really powerful, general purpose) AI exists to enshure as many stamps are delivered to its door as possable (a maximizer), it needs to make inert anything that would restrain it from that goal in any capacity. Law is subverted because with laws, you cant maximize stamps by stealing the carbon from others (likely killing them) to grow trees to stuff and let rot in a random house.

Maximizers are indiffrent to human life.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

legally yes they’ve been fined by numerous governments for excessive privacy violations

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I don’t blame Google for perusing their capitalistic interests.

I blame a neoliberal system that encourages it, and I blame capitalist apologists that get in the way of meaningful change.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

This is not the users problem. This is googles problem.

If they want to give away a thing for free, then don’t be surprised when people take that thing for free.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

My point was that people should have known it was never free to begin with.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

apologist use that soundbyte even if thats not what you ment. Ive made the same mistake.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Read more about their actual budget.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I don’t understand your comment. Can you elaborate?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

They run roughly a 50% profit margin, with ~80% of their budget coming from advertising revenue. Given that that’s amounting to about 100B year over year, with the Orwellian scope of their, what word can I use, surveillance - I would call it excessive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

recurrant subscriptions, Corprate mail hosting, non invasive ads, not double-dipping, notreadimg your mail

It doesnt make all the money, but its not corrupt.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Sometimes I wonder if people never blocked adds, would websites have less adds?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

It would add to adds 🤣 @shalva97 @joe

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I believe there would be the same amount, or possibly more ads, but more targeted and more intrusive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

But that would make websites with less adds more popular. Maybe it would increase the number of websites that just show enough adds to support their servers… I don’t know maybe it will be very small percentage, but at least not 0

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Personally I’m surprised that there’s not a premium tier that we can pay for to get quality back on Google services. Google business is the same crap but with a custom domain

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 17K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 543K

    Comments