Thomas Delrue on 12 Sep 2016 16:57:22 -0700

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [PLUG] do no evil

And as long as you're ok with not being the one that will do the
winning, that it's the other (big) guy that wins, then that's great for you.

All I'm saying is: dare to question the fundamentals of it all

On 09/12/2016 11:16 AM, John Kreno wrote:
> Capitalism ftw!
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:03 AM, Paul Walker <> wrote:
>> Under our current economic system (which shall remain nameless), service
>> providers have to walk the line between generating revenue and providing
>> useful services. It is also strategic to defer revenue in favor of
>> vacuuming up market share, building a user base, developing infrastructure
>> etc. Many of the majors seems to have been in this biz-dev mode for the
>> last ten or fifteen years. At this point, it seems pretty clear who the
>> winners are. Youtube, for instance has very recently decided to do much
>> more aggressive advertising. I have to watch a 15 second add for every
>> three minutes of content that I watch. My guess is that these choices are
>> related to a recognition that they have a functional monopoly over large
>> swaths of content (jazz tunes for instance). If the gap between them and
>> their competitors is large enough, they can afford to piss off their
>> customers. I have no doubt that Google, Apple, et. al.constantly perform
>> this calculus: how much can we get away with before our market share (and
>> profits, present or deferred) begin to slow. Given their massive
>> monopolies, I don't see that unorganized consumers, competitors, or even
>> governments (such as they are) have much leverage.</rant>
>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 10:39 AM, Rich Freeman <>
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 9:51 AM, TD <> wrote:
>>>> No, you are wrong, Google will steer you towards those companies that
>>>> generate /them/ the most revenue, not those that will solve your
>>> problem.
>>> Sure, but if they're completely useless, that won't generate them a
>>> lot of revenue.
>>> They could have had search results that were primary ad-driven for a
>>> LONG time if they wanted to.  Instead they deliver results that are
>>> useful.  I'm sure ads influence which of the useful results gets the
>>> highest priority, but they won't keep their place in the internet food
>>> chain by making their software less useful.
>>> No argument that there is a slippery slope here, and given another
>>> generation or two of executive leadership Google may start to slide
>>> down it, but at the moment they seem to be doing fairly well.
>>> Hopefully by the time they do have their fall privacy will be such a
>>> forgotten concept that it will be a moot point.
>>> --
>>> Rich
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> _______________
>>> Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --
>>> Announcements -
>>> ailman/listinfo/plug-announce
>>> General Discussion  --
>>> mailman/listinfo/plug
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> _______________
>> Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --
>> Announcements -
>> mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
>> General Discussion  --
>> mailman/listinfo/plug
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --
> Announcements -
> General Discussion  --

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --
Announcements -
General Discussion  --