1238
Justice Department considering push for historic break up of Google after landmark antitrust ruling: report (nypost.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
234 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

I think what we're running into here, is that you want to talk about removing capitalism. Which I'm all for, in the context of a functional democracy. Which isn't the case in the US or anywhere in the world.

Until we know what that looks like, and its parameters you won't admit how bad nationalising a search engine is without other privately owned alternatives.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    is that you want to talk about removing capitalism.

    I'm all for removing capitalism, but that's not really my aim in this discussion. I was more interested in the difficulty/value of nationalizing something like a search engine.

    and its parameters you won’t admit how bad nationalising a search engine is without other privately owned alternatives.

    Given the popularity and successes of NASA, the USPS, NOAA, etc, I think you are being overly pessimistic.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Given the popularity and successes of NASA, the USPS, NOAA, etc, I think you are being overly pessimistic.

    None of those things are direct propaganda tools.

    The second they start having to put maga posters into you mailbox and nobody else's you'll see it differently.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    None of those things are direct propaganda tools.

    To you they aren't, but to the right wing they are.

    The second they start having to put maga posters into you mailbox and nobody else’s you’ll see it differently.

    We are already at risk of that. I don't see what your point is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    To you they aren't, but to the right wing they are.

    I'll need some sources on that one.

    We are already at risk of that. I don't see what your point is.

    Then this conversation is pointless if you won't acknowledge the risk of it

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago

    I’ll need some sources on that one.

    I'm speaking from past experience here. I've had conversations with right wingers where I've brought up NASA articles about how one of their satellites is tracking climate change. And often times it's met with "well that's just want the government wants you to think", or "that's from NASA and therefore it's propaganda.

    On a more personal level, my mother is a lunatic anti-vaxer. She treats the CDC and FDA like they're straight out of 1984. She always either ignores shit from the CDC/FDA, tries to establish them as liars/frauds, etc.

    I don't exactly go around saving screenshots of conversations with right wingers, nor do I record arguments with my mother. And none of this lends itself to being easy to track on a search engine (esp given how shitty they are nowadays. That brings us full circle lol).

    So take my word for it or don't, I don't care.

    Then this conversation is pointless if you won’t acknowledge the risk of it

    There is risk associated with everything. You can't have public policy without risk. You can't have a president without risk. You can't have a government agency without risk. So what's your point?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent