ErisAtNyx
Google warns me that attempting view videos without Google knowing who I am is a violation of privacy. Whose? Not mine. I’d like to watch videos privately. Google’s? Not Google’s—Google has no privacy rights.
I cannot view videos on YouTube as I can view videos on broadcast TV. Apparently watching a video anonymously violates my privacy.
Who knew?
“Look at what cool things I can code!”
”Look at how much money I can make!”
”Look at how much power I have!”
Thus Facebook and Twitter, designed to allow people to communicate, use their cool, power and money to disallow disfavored communication. Thus Google, designed to supply users important and popular search results, supplies instead government-approved or Google-approved search results.
The dream of a free and open Internet was wonderful, but is now over. Henceforth the Internet will be tightly controlled by tyrannical governments in the EU and PRC. In freer countries, subtle government influence and corporate power will occult anti- and non-establishment opinion.
Burn it all down.
It’s hard to ignore one of the largest countries in the world. The question to ask yourself is, are the Chinese people better off with a limited version of Google, or are they better off with no access at all? And that’s not so clear to me. –John Hennessy, Alphabet
China may not be clear to him, but it’s clear to me that Alphabet thinks that limited versions of Google and YouTube are better for the American people.
By limited he means lying by omission.
When asked about censorship in China, Communist repression, and Laogai, Hennessy replied, “I know nothing! Nothing! — A Google search will show nothing!” [Not a real quote.]
It’s possible deceit and subterfuge by software multinationals and dependence of governments on software ends with the obsolescence of government and declaration of the World Corporate Congress.
Loss of corrupt, oppressive socialist states such as the People’s Republic of China would be no big loss. Government by Alibaba might improve China.