Google can now censor anything, other browser options

[EdwardKiy]

I get a very small chuckle about private companies and censorship.

First, there has always been some form of censorship on the net and Google. Search rankings are one form. Reporting someone for noncompliance on FB or Twitter for personal pots is another form. In light of this entire last year you can see Google and others platforms rational. And with talk of repealing the legal protections of social media platforms, it is a real possibility they can become liable for the content that is posted on various platforms.

Secondly, and as lame as it is to say, this is how it's going to be from here in out. Even platforms that have publicly stated they don't censor in fact do. It's now about the "brand" of censorship and this can be corporate, political, or state sponsored.

Thirdly, the common refrain, "they're monitoring us and stealing personal info and data. Well that's been going on for decades now and 90% of the time we give it away knowing that we are infact, giving it away lol
Ironically, this one too "how does the government collect all this data...? " They don't, they buy it from private companies primarily.

Lastly, unless we break these companies up, like we did with Oil, Trains, telecom, etc.. this is the norm. They are private companies and have the right to censor. So it comes down to how will governments chose to classify these platforms going forward? Is web access and the use of social media a new public trust/right of way..? That really is the biggy because if we do classify them as such they will then be censored by the government like radio and TV is... Then you get into that whole "fairness doctrine" debate lol

All I can say is 1984 and A Brave New World lol

So your rationalization of private and government companies breaching privacy is that they are already doing it anyway? That's just weak.

By law, whoever breached privacy, government or not, will be held accountable and punished based on punitive damages dealt - both actual and potential. That's why the Snowden situation - the government really didn't want to be held accountable. The ''brand of censorship'' is dictated by the market aka capital, and if they get your money - within the boundaries of law YOU get to decide with your money if there should be little or no censorship at all - that's how it's designed to function when the institutions of law are functional. If censorship is more than what is prescribed by law then you are looking at propaganda. Currently google breached the basic right to free speech by censoring and in doing so became a propaganda machine, like buttbook and tw@tter. De jure internet is still governed by capitalism and you are not as feeble and helpless as you are made to believe.

Breaking up media companies like we did with oil and ore companies would be giving them too much credit and would create a dangerous precedent. They are not selling a unique or finite resource, nor hold exclusive rights to anything based on dibs, and so should be treated as any other company under capitalism - play by the rules by which everyone else plays or gtfo. Unlawfully censored a company which resulted in loss of profit for them? Congratulations! Pay the damages. A doctor posts a research on COVID vaccine having side effects get censored? Pay defamation damages to both the doctor and the research institution that provided the original data. NY times posts another lie proven in court? Great! Court issues an executive order to shut it down. There is simply no room for propaganda, 'misinformation' and so no need for censorship under functional law. The other part of this story is in politics, but that would be going too far from this thread's topic.

1984 and the Zamyatin ripoff are both great guidelines to what we should avoid. What good are we if we don't at least try to avoid something we knew was coming some 80 years ago? We've overcome harder challenges in the past. Poland already passing new legislation to get some control over big tech as applied to their country and I don't see why other countries won't follow.

[PhillipOrdonez]

Free speech does not mean being able to express your shitty views.

The web has always been an advertising machine that's used for propaganda, this is why scum is getting together and growing their scum reach. About time scum got their wings cut! Finally.

The dream of truth reaching everyone got ruined because the web allowed everyone an opinion. Now fucking Nazis can reach billions potential adherents. And they've even started thinking they aren't scum because they have a platform. Disgusting.

[bxbrkrz]

[EdwardKiy]

Free speech does not mean being able to express your shitty views.

The web has always been an advertising machine that's used for propaganda, this is why scum is getting together and growing their scum reach. About time scum got their wings cut! Finally.

The dream of truth reaching everyone got ruined because the web allowed everyone an opinion. Now ferk Nazis can reach billions potential adherents. And they've even started thinking they aren't scum because they have a platform. Disgusting.

free speech includes being able to express any views, however shitty, if they are not against the law.

[Andy]

Free speech does not mean being able to express your shitty views.

Free speech protects speech you disagree with no matter how shitty. It's simple as that.

[guitfnky]

what’s the point, here? google is not a government.

even if it were, and we followed the suggestion here to its logical conclusion, hate speech, child pornography, and all the rest of the things listed ought to be available freely to everyone so we can make up our own minds whether that’s okay. you’d agree (at least I sure f%#$ing hope so) that’s insane.

[guitfnky]

Free speech does not mean being able to express your shitty views.

The web has always been an advertising machine that's used for propaganda, this is why scum is getting together and growing their scum reach. About time scum got their wings cut! Finally.

The dream of truth reaching everyone got ruined because the web allowed everyone an opinion. Now ferk Nazis can reach billions potential adherents. And they've even started thinking they aren't scum because they have a platform. Disgusting.

free speech includes being able to express any views, however shitty, if they are not against the law.

this is the cockroach of dumb constitutional arguments—it just refuses to die.

incredible how people can’t grasp the distinction between free speech and a non-governmental company’s policies.

[bxbrkrz]

what’s the point, here? google is not a government.

even if it were, and we followed the suggestion here to its logical conclusion, hate speech, child pornography, and all the rest of the things listed ought to be available freely to everyone so we can make up our own minds whether that’s okay. you’d agree (at least I sure f%#$ing hope so) that’s insane.

All the things you've listed are already illegal. Corporations are people. Google is a private citizen. All we need is more competition, not less. My main problem is Silicon Valley are the new Conquistadores. They (believe) have the right to do as they please, with all the peoples around the world. Until a new tech wipes them all out. Whaling was a big business, but some dude with a lightbulb destroyed it

Nothing lasts forever.

[guitfnky]

what’s the point, here? google is not a government.

even if it were, and we followed the suggestion here to its logical conclusion, hate speech, child pornography, and all the rest of the things listed ought to be available freely to everyone so we can make up our own minds whether that’s okay. you’d agree (at least I sure f%#$ing hope so) that’s insane.

All the things you've listed are already illegal. Corporations are people. Google is a private citizen. All we need is more competition, not less. My main problem is Silicon Valley are the new Conquistadores. They (believe) have the right to do as they please, with all the peoples around the world. Until a new tech wipes them all out. Whaling was a big business, but some dude with a lightbulb destroyed it

Nothing lasts forever.

hate speech is not illegal.

but that’s not the point. the point is, that Obama video isn’t relevant to what we’re talking about.

and complaining about a company’s business decisions is not the same thing as advocating for more competition.

[bxbrkrz]

You Either Die A Hero, Or You Live Long Enough To See Yourself Become The Villain
I used to love, love Google. Google into mining asteroids one day? Yes! Google buying Boston Dynamics? Yes! A free email bigger than 2 gig? Yes!

I guess it's just human nature. It does not matter if it's Google right now. We may be programmed by Gaia to fail, and restart again, all the time. So that we never have to contemplate our bigger Reality.

[bxbrkrz]

All the things you've listed are already illegal. Corporations are people. Google is a private citizen. All we need is more competition, not less. My main problem is Silicon Valley are the new Conquistadores. They (believe) have the right to do as they please, with all the peoples around the world. Until a new tech wipes them all out. Whaling was a big business, but some dude with a lightbulb destroyed it

Nothing lasts forever.

hate speech is not illegal.

but that’s not the point. the point is, that Obama video isn’t relevant to what we’re talking about.

and complaining about a company’s business decisions is not the same thing as advocating for more competition.

Hate speech laws by country
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_spee ... by_country

If your unique perspective is US centric, then, yes, hate speech is not illegal. Google is a global company, so they have to adapt to sell their services.
Obama is relevant. Always.
One can do both, complaining about a company and advocating for more competition... Reason+?

[guitfnky]

hate speech is not illegal.

but that’s not the point. the point is, that Obama video isn’t relevant to what we’re talking about.

and complaining about a company’s business decisions is not the same thing as advocating for more competition.

Hate speech laws by country
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_spee ... by_country

If your unique perspective is US centric, then, yes, hate speech is not illegal. Google is a global company, so they have to adapt to sell their services.
Obama is relevant. Always.
One can do both, complaining about a company and advocating for more competition... Reason+?

I love me some Obama, but that clip 1000% does not apply here.

[PhillipOrdonez]

Hate speech laws by country
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_spee ... by_country

If your unique perspective is US centric, then, yes, hate speech is not illegal. Google is a global company, so they have to adapt to sell their services.
Obama is relevant. Always.
One can do both, complaining about a company and advocating for more competition... Reason+?

I love me some Obama, but that clip 1000% does not apply here.

Unless you equate the web with a college campus where debates happen face to face with your peers...

[jam-s]

Could be. I was told by several women (hetero-consensually) that I have a Big Deep. Didn't give it much attention at the time.

Typical autocorrect fail by the Simulation and its several_women.exe.
We won't remember it after our next Gagl auto update.

[bxbrkrz]

Hate speech laws by country
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_spee ... by_country

If your unique perspective is US centric, then, yes, hate speech is not illegal. Google is a global company, so they have to adapt to sell their services.
Obama is relevant. Always.
One can do both, complaining about a company and advocating for more competition... Reason+?

I love me some Obama, but that clip 1000% does not apply here.

2000% it does

[bxbrkrz]

I love me some Obama, but that clip 1000% does not apply here.

Unless you equate the web with a college campus where debates happen face to face with your peers...

Or on a thread on the internet with highly intelligent people full of hope for humanity. We don't need face to face, and most faces are covered with a mask right now anyway

[bxbrkrz]

Typical autocorrect fail by the Simulation and its several_women.exe.
We won't remember it after our next Gagl auto update.

I feel OOTL when not watching television for 8 years. I know that cartoon, but missing the full context.
All my memes are very old, sadly

[PhillipOrdonez]

Unless you equate the web with a college campus where debates happen face to face with your peers...

Or on a thread on the internet with highly intelligent people full of hope for humanity. We don't need face to face, and most faces are covered with a mask right now anyway

You're giving too much credit to strangers on the internet.

There's people reading false things in the web right now, and believing them. Like the lie that there's only highly intelligent people in this thread. (!!!!)

There's people writing false things with a tone of authority in some thread right now, indoctrinating children into some disgusting ideology like fascism or encouraging them to kill others in the name of their idols. For example.

Just like when Obama was in college...

There shouldn't be any place for scum like that. Scum needs to learn they're scum.

[miscend]

Google and other engines have every right to block questionable content. Would you be OK with racist material and paedophilia being easily accessible on the internet? What is it exactly that you are trying to hide by keeping your web presence completely anonymous.

The right to decide what is allowed and what is not belongs to the existing democratic institutions, namely, to the legislative bodies of various states. You can enact laws to prohibit racism or paedophilia. Google and the engines usurp that right to restrict the freedom of speech and go far beyond the law, thus violating it in some countries where the censorship is forbidden.

Exactly most of these editorial decisions are based on laws, Google can block access to certain sites depending on the law or their interpretation of it as opined by their lawyers. Google has to follow local laws, in the same way they block search results to certain piracy web sites if you search for them in the UK, these sites are not illegal in countries like Russia but they are blocked in other parts of Europe.

[miscend]

Bloggers make pennies on ads. They make money on sponsors, affiliate sales and services. News sites have paywalls so they can pretend to be independent.

Therefore it's correct to rob bloggers of a few pennies out of their income?

Google and other engines should have very limited rights of censorship, if any at all. In case you didn't know, paedophilia and racist materials are prohibited and banned in most countries on the planet and have been for decades. There is no paedophilia online because if there had been a) the people responsible would be immediately identified and put to jail or executed b) porn sites have terms and conditions based on legality. Good luck finding paedophilia materials online.

Such stuff is banned but still accessible if you know where to look. If you read the news whenever they arrest pedos, cops go through their computers and also do a thorough forensic analysis of all their online activity including their internet searches in order to have enough evidence to convict. The cops will also get records from services like Google, Facebook and your mobile phone network provider. This wouldn't be possible if it was easy to browse and access the internet completely anonymously without leaving an online fingerprint. In fact it would make it much harder to catch bad guys.

Also far right sites such as 8chan which indoctrinated the Christchurch mosque shooter and other similar image boards are easily accessible online. These sites often have the most extreme material on their servers and get away with it because they are hosted overseas. It's good that Google has used their judgement to block search results to these sites as much as possible.

[guitfnky]

I love me some Obama, but that clip 1000% does not apply here.

2000% it does

30000% false.

[bxbrkrz]

Or on a thread on the internet with highly intelligent people full of hope for humanity. We don't need face to face, and most faces are covered with a mask right now anyway

You're giving too much credit to strangers on the internet.

There's people reading false things in the web right now, and believing them. Like the lie that there's only highly intelligent people in this thread. (!!!!)

There's people writing false things with a tone of authority in some thread right now, indoctrinating children into some disgusting ideology like fascism or encouraging them to kill others in the name of their idols. For example.

Just like when Obama was in college...

There shouldn't be any place for scum like that. Scum needs to learn they're scum.

What a scary world the internet is. I understand why Google is so important to us all, the good people.

[bxbrkrz]

2000% it does

30000% false.

[your%]+1

[guitfnky]

I love me some Obama, but that clip 1000% does not apply here.

Unless you equate the web with a college campus where debates happen face to face with your peers...

yep, and where the college campus books a pedophile to come speak, complete with a Powerpoint presentation.

[guitfnky]

30000% false.

[your%]+1

okay, now I agree. thank you for your cogent and rational argument.