Google must be broken

[blackpower]

They have become monopolists and for the sake of the free society Government must break them.
They seem to be running a scam with their adwords/adsense ?
Is it not a scum that only a monopolist can afford?
They sell you adwords ad for $1.50 cents a click and pay you 0.01 cent in adsense ads on your site.
Don't we all witness this? And many other things?
We as a society cannot allow corporations that big and powerful.
Who could check on them?
Imagine, They start working against interests of the country, like providing support to the enemy (i.e. russians or muslim fanatics)?
I am not a big fan of Government but even a lesser fan of corporations.

[blackpower]

Russia attempts to block Google Russia on its territory:
http://echo.msk.ru/news/2005072-echo.html

Trump will be afraid to do the same because everybody would say he's colluded with Russkies.

[blackpower]

European Union regulators slapped Google with a record €2.4 billion ($2.7 billion) antitrust fine on Tuesday, the latest broadside fired at big American tech companies doing business in the region.
The European Commission found that the U.S. tech giant denied "consumers a genuine choice" by using its search engine to unfairly steer them to its own shopping platform.
Regulators said that Google must change its behavior within 90 days or face additional penalties.
"What Google has done is illegal under EU antitrust rules," said Margrethe Vestager, the bloc's top antitrust official. "It denied other companies the chance to compete on the merits and to innovate. And most importantly, it denied European consumers a genuine choice of services and the full benefits of innovation."
Google (GOOGL, Tech30) said in a statement that it tries to show ads in ways that are helpful for buyers and sellers.
"We respectfully disagree with the conclusions announced today," a Google spokesperson said. "We will review the Commission's decision in detail as we consider an appeal, and we look forward to continuing to make our case."
The Commission said that Google acted illegally by giving priority placement in search results to its own shopping service, while relegating results from rivals to areas where potential buyers were much less likely to click.
google shopping box
Google Shopping box is displayed above other results.
It could have fined Google as much as 10% of its annual sales, or roughly $9 billion.
Vestager said Google's competitors could claim compensation in national courts within the EU. She said hundreds of companies, including some based in the U.S., complained about the way Google displayed its shopping service.
Shares in Google parent company Alphabet dropped by 1.2% in premarket trading.
Tuesday's fine dwarfs the previous EU record antitrust penalty of €1.06 billion ($1.2 billion) imposed on Intel (INTC, Tech30) in 2009. Intel has been fighting to overturn that decision ever since.
Google's regulatory headache in Europe doesn't end with the online shopping case, which dates back to 2010.
The EU has also accused the Silicon Valley titan of abusing its market position by imposing restrictions on Android device manufacturers and mobile network operators.
It is also investigating the company's ad placing service, AdSense.

[Drewbert]

Wouldn't it be nice if investigations uncovered just how much Domainers are being ripped off and Google (sorry, "the upstream provider") was forced to make good?

[blackpower]

Not only Google but Facebook and /or any other monopoly should be broken or be under government control;
It is not a secret that during past election in USA malicious players manipulated public opinion through Facebook in particular.
Article:


The decades after World War II, the United States created an international order whose centerpiece was the dominance of American military power.

However, a new study issued by the U.S. Department of Defense suggests that this order “may be collapsing,” with little hope of revival in the near term.

An AlterNet report on the study reveals that the Pentagon believes the United States can no longer consider itself an “unassailable” military giant, as it traditionally has been since the end of the Cold War.

“While the United States remains a global political, economic, and military giant, it no longer enjoys an unassailable position versus state competitors,” the report states. “In brief, the sta­tus quo that was hatched and nurtured by U.S. strategists after World War II and has for decades been the principal ‘beat’ for DoD is not merely fraying but may, in fact, be collapsing.”

Among other things, the study claims that global events are now happening at a much faster pace than ever before and with little warning, which challenges the DoD’s ability to respond in a timely fashion. What’s more, the Pentagon is having trouble responding to the ways that anti-American propaganda spreads rapidly across the internet, with no way to combat it in real time.

Even more alarmingly, according to the study, is that the United States itself has been plunged into a period of political instability thanks to constant connectivity in which people can choose to read only information that confirms their own beliefs and ideologies.

“The United States and its population are increasingly exposed to substantial harm and an erosion of security from individuals and small groups of motivated actors, leveraging the conflu­ence of hyperconnectivity, fear, and increased vulner­ability to sow disorder and uncertainty,” the report states. “This intensely disorienting and dislocating form of resistance to author­ity arrives via physical, virtual, and psychological vio­lence and can create effects that appear substantially out of proportion to the origin and physical size or scale of the proximate hazard or threat.”

To combat this decline and preserve American dominance, writes AlterNet, the study “calls for the US government to invest in more surveillance, better propaganda through ‘strategic manipulation’ of public opinion, and a ‘wider and more flexible’ US military.”

----------------------------
We must come to abolish the "One Person, One Vote" doctrine , because 90% of population everywhere are idiots and should never vote in the first place.
What do you think?

[Avtal]

Originally Posted by blackpower

We must come to abolish the "One Person, One Vote" doctrine , because 90% of population everywhere are idiots and should never vote in the first place.
What do you think?

The well-known science fiction writer Robert A. Heinlein had a proposal along those lines: In order to vote, you first have to solve a quadratic equation. If you get the answer wrong, you don't get to vote.

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/...in_on_vot.html

I'm not endorsing this, just mentioning it.

Avtal

[blackpower]

In the ideal world, this would be a just thing to do; But we don't live in an ideal world;
Look what is going on in USA..... Never thought that US could elect such a lowlife scumbag;
Dangerous, dangerous....
I feel like it's 1938 again.

[Avtal]

Not 1938. Putin isn't Stalin, and Trump is not Hitler (or Roosevelt).

Try 1913.

By 1913, the telegraph allowed instantaneous worldwide communication. It was believed that this made war less likely than before, because misunderstandings could quickly be ironed out.

Steamships allowed people and goods to travel from one end of the earth to the other, facilitating ever-increasing international trade. It was believed that this growing economic interdependence between nations made war economically infeasible.

Despite the growing belief that in the high-tech world of 1913, war was obsolete, there were a couple of areas of concern.

The major super-power, with a world-spanning navy (England), was butting heads with a rapidly industrializing nation seeking to overcome centuries of powerlessness (Germany). And a major national leader was recognized to be egotistical, erratic, easily offended, and like a bull in a china shop as far as foreign affairs were concerned (Kaiser Wilhelm II).

Still, in 1913, a major war seemed unthinkable, despite some clouds on the horizon. But in 1914, the heir to the Austrian throne was assassinated in a small city in the Balkans. A couple of months later, Germany (which had few interests in the Balkans) sent its troops into Belgium (with even fewer interests in the Balkans), and the war began, 800 miles away from the scene of the assassination, which in some incomprehensible way had been the spark for it all.

As a result of this "unthinkable" war, tens of millions of people died, the Russian Empire was replaced by the USSR, and the stage was set for World War II and eventually the Cold War. You might argue that in some sense, the "Great War" (as it was called in 1914) did not end until 1991, with the fall of the Soviet Union. European civilization was set back by decades.

And even now, historians argue about how a political assassination in one obscure corner of Europe could spark such destruction.

So if you want something to worry about, don't think 1938. Think 1913.

Avtal

[blackpower]

I think you are right about 1913, of course;
And Great War did not end in 1991, it seems; Why men so stupid?
May be , The Feminism is the answer? May be in the brilliant Society of the future, all man should be castrated at birth and this will solve problem with wars?

[jose]

I bought FB at $30. Still holding

Just blew today: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/FB?p=FB

How I loved to be a jerk on this thread till mods cut me out:
http://www.idnforums.com/forums/3146...ng-fad-12.html

[blackpower]

Originally Posted by blackpower

May be , The Feminism is the answer? May be in the brilliant Society of the future, all man should be castrated at birth and this will solve problem with wars?

It looks like the Nature is taking care of this... Well, sort of. It's eigther Feminism or Rule of the Dark men. And we all know how their countries look like.There will be Wars.

-----------------------------------
Sperm count in men from North America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand declined by 50-60% between 1973 and 2011, according to a new study from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Surprisingly, the study, which analysed data on the sperm counts of 42,935 men, found no decline in sperm counts in men from Asia, Africa and South America, although there was limited data from these areas.
In fact, if the data on sperm counts is extrapolated to its logical conclusion, white* men will have little or no reproductive capacity from 2060 onwards.
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/07/huge...are-the-facts/