• joe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    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?

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • joe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • opt9@feddit.ch
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

            • opt9@feddit.ch
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              well like I said, I found Reddit abusive in their spying, censorship and money grabs, so I dropped them and came here. The people who care will drop Google, the rest will remain as victims. Can’t save someone who doesn’t want to be saved. I think many haven’t realized that is us the users who give these big corps all their power.

              • joe@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                How do you know your instance doesn’t spy, censor, or… well, I guess you’re correct on the money grabs part, haha.

                • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  If they were concerned, they could spin up their own instance or join one that’s run by someone they trust.

                  The same could not be said for reddit.

                  Why are you even here?

                • opt9@feddit.ch
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I assume everyone is spying but i use a vpn so I don’t care. Censorship here is difficult for a server as people can very easily change to another one, and money grabs are pretty hard here 😉 Nothing is perfect, but I like this place a lot more than reddit. I don’t use anything Google and am enjoying that also.

        • darkkite@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

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

          • joe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s fair but presumably, since they’re not racking up fines cumulatively, that they are now in accordance with the law… so are you saying that the current level is “reasonable”? Am I misunderstanding you point?

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

        • Hello Hotel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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.

    • hightrix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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.

        • dx1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          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.

    • Hello Hotel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

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

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

    • hellishharlot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      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