And that money goes to support many industries beyond search itself. The author really needs to get off a computer for a minute and understand the economics of the web as it stands today and how the free ad supported model supports millions of peoples livelihoods before jumping to "This is all bullshit"
While I agree that they may need to better consider the economics - both of the engine and the websites that may SEO it- that doesn’t mean we should just assume as supported is the way to go or the only way to support people. The economy of today looks different than 20 years ago or 20 years before that. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t grow and change.
I respect that. I guess my point is "Grow and change with a decent understanding of what the present state enables"
A search engine like Google isn't just a search engine as the author describes it. It is a very integral part of the economy of the internet and just labelling a simplistic interpretation of the present state as "Evil" with an academically poor write up of what a viable alternative is does little good.
I want to write articles and read articles written for me by others. Ideally as few as possible should profit from this process.
As google is now a turd, not just no longer capable of delivering this service but actively destroying the good part of the web by refusing to index it.
It is my attention, it doesn't belong to anyone else.
My access to information and educated opinion is a far more integral part of the greater economy.
Google is like a screaming man at a town meeting making sure no one else can get a word in. The meeting is now pointless.
Google is a catalogue. There is no physical analogy that comes close.
Your point about wanting to read articles written for you by others is certainly possible. The very fact that such a desirable outcome drives you to Google and nowhere else should suggest the complexity of the problem they’re solving and how there isn’t really anything else out there doing so well.
>Ideally as few as possible should profit from this process.
Why?
When you accepted a job offer in the software industry, did you stipulate that your mission is to write code for your employer and you will be charging as little as possible for that privilege? Minimum wage should get you by just fine, right?
I hate fully grown adults behaving as though anyone except them making a profit is somehow evil.
> The very fact that such a desirable outcome drives you to Google and nowhere else should suggest the complexity of the problem they’re solving and how there isn’t really anything else out there doing so well.
Yes and I'm not impressed.
> > Ideally as few as possible should profit from this process.
> Why?
> When you accepted a job offer in the software industry, did you stipulate that your mission is to write code for your employer and you will be charging as little as possible for that privilege? Minimum wage should get you by just fine, right?
I'm not a good example as I indeed live wonderfully on minimum wage and write software for free.
> I hate fully grown adults behaving as though anyone except them making a profit is somehow evil.
Don't worry, my philosophy is not that superficial. We have people who make things, people who organize the making of things and people who organize the things made.
It can be true that the meta data is more valuable than the data it self and organizing an effort can be much more intense than any of the tasks involved. But lets not pretend that is always the case.
Before money and before the written word we had the exchange of thoughts, observations and ideas. I believe this to be somewhat like the foundation on which everything else we did is build. I want to see this process benefit from technology.
You wrote your comment perhaps a bit limited by the ropes of the platform but sincerely, free from any agenda, you wrote pretty much what you think.
Now if we [beyond HN] add additional layers of agendas between our exchange, each interested in maximizing their profit from it perhaps not you but many others will resort to self-moderation.
You wont be able to state it simply like: "I hate fully grown adults behaving as though anyone except them making a profit is somehow evil."
It could become something like "I don't understand why some people don't like others making money" stripped from how strong you feel about the subject. You could also chose not to say anything.
At that point we are messing with the very fabric of our collective reality.
If I had to chose between freely communicating and the economy it wouldn't be a hard choice.
Lying in a privacy policy and breaching privacy-related regulations can also be fraud and illegal. Think about why there's so much pushback against the GDPR despite it only primarily mandating transparency with regards to data usage (if they were doing things above-board why would they be afraid?).
