The Market Ticker
Rss Icon RSS available
You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
Comments on Facepig, Snapfool and You
User: Not logged on
Top Forum Top Login FAQ Register Clear Cookie
Showing Page 2 of 3  First123Last
User Info Facepig, Snapfool and You in forum [Market-Ticker]
Ckaminski
Posts: 4149
Incept: 2011-04-08

Mass-Hole!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Quote:
when a niece said she had taken 600 photos of her firstborn, in just 2 weeks


Let's be honest now, if film had been free in the 70's there would probably be a LOT more surviving photographs of me and my sister. If cameras fit in the palm of your hand and were something you kept on you at all time.

Life sure is different. I don't know if it's necessarily worse because of the technology. It can be.

One shouldn't live life through a camera/phone, but capturing memories on film is something EVERY generation has done since the invention of film. We've just made it stupid easy and effectively free.
Tickerguy
Posts: 149426
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Exactly.

Go toss on a backpack and head toward any of the USFS land that is mostly unregulated. Most of the AT is in this category (but not all), along with many other trails.

There are no reservations, no facilities and nobody else. What there ARE is the sound of the forest - the wind in the trees, the bees buzzing around pollinating flowers, the squirrel in the tree chattering at you, birds and similar.

Just *one night* spent out under the stars with the phone off -- either intentionally or because it has no service and is worthless -- and you'd be utterly stunned at how your perception of things changes.

If you have instrumentation (like my Garmin which measures heart rate all the time) you'll also notice the difference there too. It's both rapid and profound.

----------
Winding it down.
Asimov
Posts: 109428
Incept: 2007-08-26

East Tennessee Eastern Time
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Here's where we took the kids to play last weekend. About a mile hike with ~350ft elevation change. We'll be going back.



I haven't done any post processing on the image yet. It was pretty hard to get decently because sunlight was shining on the falls themselves, but most everywhere else was in shade. My first attempt at motion blurred running water.

----------
It's justifiably immoral to deal morally with an immoral entity.

Festina lente.

Burya_rubenstein
Posts: 1251
Incept: 2007-08-08

Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
A bit off topic perhaps but I'd like to mention that at least one episode each of Babylon 5, The Expanse, and Battlestar Galactica 2005 did show someone going to the head. (And in the latter show, the room was co-ed!)

As far as Face (in the) Book goes, that only gets used through a browser here as well, though I do have dedicated apps built into my phones. FB seems to think I'm a truck driver living somewhere in Kansas, probably due to the proxy setup nature of UC Browser. (In fact I'm in the Detroit area and have never in my life set foot on a semi.)
Nonsensical
Posts: 111
Incept: 2017-06-16

Los Angeles, Ca
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
People, I'll try to point out what's at stake. For now, and only for now, do you have the option to disconnect. But the way things are going, in less than ten years you will not.

Socrates was always around the young conversing with them, and always concerned with th health of the youth. That's because this reflects everything in society. So I myself often visit college campuses, whether it's sports related or academic, I'm always willing to converse with people. So I've had some chances to converse with engineers involved with the tech world.

There's been a lot of vital steps in creating our current Internet, from ARPANET, TCP/IP, HTML, HTTP, URL, World Wide Web, and of course all the names associated with it from Von Neumann to Tim Berners-Lee. But there's two men that really stand out Norbert Wiener and Vannevar Bush (possibly three as Licklider's name comes up a lot more who was a psychologist/computer scientist).

It's really only Wiener I want to bring to attention. Wiener devised an anti-aircraft gun that could track down German bombers and shoot them down. Now what does this have to do with Facebook and Google and such?

Wiener saw the problem as an information systems challenge and invented a flight path predictor that relied on a continuous stream of information that flowed back and forth between the gun and its operator. This in essence was a self correcting information system between man and machine.

Wiener's problem was making sense of scarce information, whereas Vannevar Bush was worried about epistemological overload, that is, an abundance of information. However, where I want to take this post, I'm only concerned about the scarcity. On the Net, there's a situation of scarcity and abundance of information. In the physical world, right now the tech companies are facing a scarcity of information. That they intend to rectify.

In 2013, I believe it was, Google made a series of robotics company purchases, nine companies in six months. This should've been scrutinized by the Justice Department, but of course it wasn't. But so was Facebook and Amazon. But one of the companies Google purchased was Boston Dynamics. Which they recently sold. Which is interesting. There's reasons to cite that are cited regarding the selling, the poor communication between Google and Boston Dynamics and the founder leaving along with some engineers, etc. But Google was always hands off with these companies. As a matter of fact, Google never directed any of their research, they were basically instructed to come up with whatever you want to.

What happened is Boston Dynamics released a video of someone kicking down a humanoid robot and the rob got back up. This of course impressed a lot of people, except the people at Google. Shortly after, they sold the company.

The question is why. Because Google doesn't care about building robots to replace fast food workers, and household servants, or even soldiers. What they're interested in is the miniturization of robotics to act as an unobtrusive flight path predictor.

Google's concern is acting as the mapper and organizer not just of information on the Web, but ALL information. Back in 2011, I think it was,(using my phone makes it difficult to link articles and such), Eric Schmidt had said that Google's intent was not just to act as a neutral facilitator of information, but that it would eventually be your source of answers to the question what do I do now, that it would tell you what to do with your day. Schmidt said they were going to do this because he felt that this is actually what people want.

And those places where you get no signal, Google, Facebook, Amazon have already sought out FAA approval from drones. For Facebook and Google, they're offering to provide Internet connection via drones wherever in the world there isn't a signal, for free.

It's not that they want to map the physical world and then leave it, no, they want to continuously do it in real time, as a flight path predictor. No matter where you're at. National forest. They'll have unobtrusive monitoring devices. On a boat, they'll have drones constantly flying in high altitudes.

The thing about these tech leaders is that they don't care about money. This has always been a problem venture capitalists have when dealing with silicon valley, the tech guys are slow to monetize, if they even think about it. This was a "problem" when VCs were dealing with Page and Brin. The thing that makes Google so profitable is its advertising, but ad words and ad sense really isn't that good. As a matter of fact, the only ads it shows you are either things you're looking for or things you've already seen. They've completely neglected this part (now a guy like Bezos is sorta different, in that he wasn't a tech guy per se, he came over from being a hedge fund manager, although he does have some tech background). What makes this point important is that they don't care whether it can be monetized.

A project of this undertaking is only possible financially by an entity that has an enormous amount of resources at its disposal. That kind of entity is a monopoly. That can either take the form of a government (and all governments are a monopoly) or a corporate monopoly. The monopolistic power of the government is inherent, and is really unavoidable, unless you want to be over run by a band of barbarians.

Nonsensical
Posts: 111
Incept: 2017-06-16

Los Angeles, Ca
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I accidentally hit the post button, big hands on a small phone. So I'll continue from where I broke off, albeit with a loss of train of thought, but then it was probably badly expressed anyway.

I'll conclude. The point is, because of the monopolistic status of these corporations they have been able to concentrate enough wealth and power to continue on with this project of trying to become the mediator. For Google, they want to be the only mediator between you and information. For Facebook, they want to be the only mediator between you and communication with other. For Amazon, they want to be the only mediator between you and retail. And so on. The resources to extend these projects or quests would not be possible if not for their monopolistic status because these things are NOT happening organically, or at least not organically to what people politically want. If it was, then people would be clamoring for the government to put monitoring devices everywhere.

Your time is running out and so are the places to retreat to.
Nonsensical
Posts: 111
Incept: 2017-06-16

Los Angeles, Ca
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I used to think a possible solution to this was making the tech companies like Google and Facebook a utility. That was recently proposed by Steve Bannon. I don't think that's a viable option.

I think the only viable option is to dismantle the companies through anti-trust laws and simply make the move financial unfeasible economically unless initiated by governmental powers. That's assuming a peaceful solution, though.
Wearedoomed
Posts: 4222
Incept: 2009-01-14

slightly red state
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Nonsensical, if you are willing, please do post those links when you have a chance. Thank you.

----------
A collectivist defines peace as the silence of their enemies, through fear, imprisonment or death. That's how they define peace. - Mike Vanderboegh
Clock
Posts: 1117
Incept: 2007-09-18

South of Billings Mt
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I had a FB account when it first started about 10 years ago; didn't do anything for me, used it 2 or 3 times.

Most of the kids use FB because they like fantasy...and there's lots of fantasy there. Parents need to teach their kids the difference between fantasy world and real life...before they find out the hard way.

----------

~ Would anybody else like to see what Hillary's 'Get out of Jail' ticket looks like? ~

Wa9jml
Posts: 21
Incept: 2017-04-29

DeKalb, Illinois
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I was the executor of my cousin's estate. When we finally cleared out her house, there were tub after tub of photo albums. When she was born, her dad took thousands of Polaroid pictures of her, and continued on for many years. I salvaged one ancient album of pictures, and let the other heirs look over the rest. We wound up throwing out almost all of them. Eventually, there is nobody left who can appreciate a lot of these pictures. So, they get tossed.
Dennisglover
Posts: 715
Incept: 2012-12-05

Huntsville, AL
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Not long ago a very close family member told me about following her childrens' (ages 36, 29, and 26) locations by "monitoring", meaning that she can always use an iPhone "locator" to learn where the phones are. The kids all live in a Western Southern State, and she lives in an Eastern Southern State.

My thought is that this would not be possible had not the "kids" allowed it. I'd like very much to talk with the "kids" about the whole thing, but they don't seem to care too much either about talking or coming to terms with things--the last time I spoke with any of them was in May, 2011. All right, then.

Last month the 29-year old daughter and her "friend" went to South Beach (in/near) Miami for a few days while the aforementioned family member was baby-sitting the daughter's 9-year old son. Family member was watching the position of the daughter's iPhone the whole time, and it took more than 18 hours for her to get from Miami to far West in the Panhandle of Florida, call it Crestview... I suppose some stops were not planned for them, but in 1968 I was able to drive to North Central Alabama from Clearwater/Tampa in about 18 hours, and my route took me through/around Atlanta, while a whole lot of I-75 wasn't complete from Valdosta to Griffin...

Something seems slaunched sideways about all of what happened last month, but no one involved seems to be very concerned. Again, okay. I'd guess the phone-tracking was in some way enough.

The stupid continues to burn, you know.

@Nonsensical, you offer some intriguing points here, and I want to think about a lot of them before I comment, but I think you are on to something.

Blessings, Peace, and Grace to all...

----------
TANSTAAFL
Nonsensical
Posts: 111
Incept: 2017-06-16

Los Angeles, Ca
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Hello @wearedoomed.

Yes of course. But I'll do something better, I'll let Eric Schmidt tell you himself. This is Eric Schmidt at IFA 2010 on September 7, 2010 in Berlin (I was incorrect about it being 2011).



I suggest listen to the whole thing, but at the 16 minute mark it really gets good, with (in)famous quotes like:

Quote:
Ultimately, search is not just the web but literally all of your information your email, the things you care about, with your permission this is personal search, for you and only for you.

or later

We can suggest what you should do next, what you care about. Imagine: We know where you are, we know what you like.

or

A near-term future in which you dont forget anything, because the computer remembers. Youre never lost.


And here's an article covering it: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/08....

And here's Schmidt, again, Oct 2010: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/10/04....

And now, let's go all the way back to 2007, Eric Schmidt saying what Google's goal is: https://www.ft.com/content/c3e49548-088e....

Schmidt is easier to nail because he's a lot more active than Larry Page, and certainly than Sergey Brin. Schmidt has made comments like this quite often. The thing is, Google doesn't really see anything wrong with what they're doing. So it's not always the intent, because the intent can be good. But more on this at the end of this post.

But Google's stated goal has always been Search, and that is in regards to everything.

Here's Google's purchase of Boston Dynamics and 7 other robotics companies in 6 months (I think I said nine, should've been 8 total): http://www.cbsnews.com/news/google-buys-....

Here's Boston Dynamics Robot video, from Feb. 24 2016 (I think Boston Dynamics released the video themselves a couple of weeks earlier).



This is quite an accomplishment in robotics.

Then in June, 2017, Google announces sale of Boston Dynamics to Softbank: http://money.cnn.com/2017/06/09/technolo....

The reason Google cited was that they didn't think Boston Dynamics would have a viable product within the next few years. What?! Google throws money around without any consideration of a monetary product. I'm not privy to any inside board meetings or anything, but then why this robotics company. In terms of humanoid robots Boston Dynamics is considered one of the leaders. I'd speculate it's because Google doesn't see anything for them there to advance Search, which is what Page and Brin are most concerned about.

Likely given the time frame Google decided to sell shortly after and then it took them some time to find a buyer and work the deal out. But you decide.

Here's a link to Google-X's Loon Project: https://x.company/projects/loon/

Here's Facebook's Aquila project: https://www.facebook.com/notes/mark-zuck....

Let me know if this doesn't cover it all.

Hello @Denningerslover

You'd have to be more specific but here's some things to consider:

In 2010, the State of Texas opens a probe on Google: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/04/techno....

In 2011, the FTC opened an investigation into Google: http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/24/technolo....

But in 2013, Google dodges it: http://money.cnn.com/2013/01/03/technolo....

And this follow up story, from March, 2015: http://money.cnn.com/2015/03/19/technolo....

Turns out experts within the FTC did think Google abused its market position.

And of course we have the EU's investigation and fines in June: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/27/techn....

There's plenty more than that. But more importantly, Google has been recognized holding a monopolistic status AND that it has violated that position. But whether benign or not, monopolies should not exist because the concentration of wealth and power to that scale inherently threatens political rights and freedoms. The internal management of a monopoly just communicating with each other would by definition constitute collusion, that is, if they held ANY company secrets--that would include proprietary trade secrets.

But it goes beyond that. Let's say, that a monopoly has good intents, or at least the leaders of that monopoly think they do (which they always do). They would still be (en)forcing their vision of the world onto others that have to involuntarily participate in it, that's assuming we even knew what we were participating in until it was too late. For example, we may come to realize that these companies are monopolies, but if we wait too long, a lot of damage is done in the meantime for viable competition and they've artificially changed the landscape that might not be able to be undone. Artificially here means without the expressed political consent of the public body.

Without the massive concentration of wealth and power then what would have to happen is that anyone with a particular vision of the world would have to pitch it to the public for consideration. They can do that through art, public speeches, the political process, etc. The point of anti-trust laws is so that the only monopolistic power is the government, which is something we can actively participate in, AND actively redress. And luckily we've had at least some wise moments to pass anti-trust laws that preserve regional competition.

There's a lot that one can go into against monopolies, just the fact of preventing them on any significant scale (before 1980, they even went after regional monopolies) not only allows people an economic chance to earn a living, but you can boycott a company whose practice you don't support.

Now, the position we are in today is that there's not much done in the United States against monopolies. Maybe for the past 30-40 years, political leaders of both parties have even avoided mentioning anti-trust laws and monopolies. That is, until recently, there's been two major party leaders (and there's been Sanders and some marginal players).

There was Trump around May of 2016, about a 1:30 in:



And recently, Chuck Schumer in the NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/24/opini....

Maybe there are other high ranking politicians, but there are the only two I know of i the last few decades--and yes, there was the Microsoft trial, but it was oddly handled and Bill Clinton was the one that had removed mention of anti-trust being a platform position for the Democrats.

Trump doesn't seem like he's going to do anything, or won't be able to given the fire he's under. But with Sessions having recused himself, he should have time unless he's busy being a serial lurker.

So there's Schumer. I don't know if he intents to go through with it. There's some reasons to think he will. But. more importantly, it's our job to make sure he does. Because now we have something to cite. Or you can call up you're local Democrat politician or anyone running and ask them where they stand on this. Again, you now have an open declaration to cite.

Reason: fixed link, added 2 more links
Nonsensical
Posts: 111
Incept: 2017-06-16

Los Angeles, Ca
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
And Parents who have let their children sign up and use Facebook: are you even aware of what you are allowing?

Here's a link to Facebook's terms and conditions, which everyone should read, but especially parents. Read section 9, About Advertisements, subsection 1.

https://www.facebook.com/terms.php?_fb_n....

The courts ruled that that was ok, that is, basically if someone under the age of 18 creates a Facebook account, it is legally assumed that you the parent have given them permission to use any and all information of theirs on Facebook for commercial uses. And yes, Facebook has and does do it. [URLhttps://www.law360.com/articles/242831/f....]

Even though this using children's images to make money without asking the parents first is illegal in seven states: California, Florida, New York, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

But it's on the internet so it's okay. What's the harm in fantasy, right?
Nadavegan
Posts: 23
Incept: 2017-05-03

The South
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Nonsensical:

Thank you for your work in putting all of that together. I have LONG wondered where the true payoff was for these tech companies. I thought that Amazon testing drones for immediate delivery was silly. After all, it his hard to imagine neighborhoods full of drones buzzing back and forth from the grocery store every time Mommy runs low and needs a box of Teddy Grahams. But I think you may have nailed it - essentially, they are researching how to build a neural surveillance network that corporations can use to predict our movements precisely and sell us more and more crap.

And the thing is, I think most people will be OK with it. I talk to people who LOVE targeted ads. It really makes them feel "special". They like being interrupted with suggestions because they don't want to do the hard work of thinking or introspecting.

Furthermore, much can change in a single generation. I would wager the mean age of this Forum is 40+. I have raised my children to be critical Luddites, as much as is possible. But the sea of assumptions that they swim in as teenagers today is very different from my own, and the change has only happened in 10 years or so. We look at the 1970's as some other era altogether; the 1970's could never happen today. In 40 years it became taboo to let a child ride his or her bike to the next neighborhood to roam with a pack of kids all day. When I was 3, I was running around with some neighbor kids and got the tip of my finger cut off when I tried to pick up a piece of broken glass. 40 years later I would be removed from my home, and my parents would be Internet pariahs.

And most insidious of all - I think in a few more years, most people will need an external neural network to function. "People will never be lost again." How ignorant. The most lost I have ever been was the one time I tried using a GPS to navigate through a rural area, rather than studying a map for 5 minutes and getting oriented. Another time, I was driving with a co-worker in the evening a few years ago, and she was terrified I was lost because I wouldn't use her GPS. "We need to be going west, which we are." "How do you know???" "See that giant orange ball in the sky, directly in front of us? I hear it sets in the west." Technology has provided too many benefits to count, but the price has been mass dependency and infantilization. I work in Excel most of the day, and find I now struggle more with even simple calculations in my head. I cannot be the only one, nor the most extreme case.

In short, what you are saying is that the people are being corralled into pens, kept by a few monopolies, to be IV-drip-fed a steady diet of materialism, but not too fast, so earnings continue to rise, forever.
Ckaminski
Posts: 4149
Incept: 2011-04-08

Mass-Hole!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Quote:
Not long ago a very close family member told me about following her childrens' (ages 36, 29, and 26) locations by "monitoring", meaning that she can always use an iPhone "locator" to learn where the phones are.


I have this capability as the IT guy in the house, and controller and "owner" of the phones. I could make it a condition of having me pay said service and provide said device. But I don't. I respect my kids enough to trust them. My *ONLY* requirement is that when I call or text, I get an answer in as expeditiously a timeframe as possible, since that is why *I and their mother* pay for said things.

My dad did this to my mom a bit when they first got their iPhones, but it was mostly a curiosity thing with the state of technology, and to rile up my mom every now and again.

As an aside a Z30 nearly survived a dunk in the toilet and then a BRIEF, but well intentioned, visit to the microwave to dry it out. Mobile data still works, one band of wifi still works, screen and digitizer are perfect, but the speaker/mic and phone capabilities are completely toast. I may have it available for parts soon for anyone with a Verizon Z30. Tragic, that screen is soooo beautiful.

Lenguado
Posts: 2057
Incept: 2010-01-12
A True American Patriot!
Orlando, FL
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Roundabout,
Quote:
I don't even post here a lot, only if I feel I have something to add to the conversation- because I recognize not everyone is interested in what I have to say.
You may feel that way, but unlike FB, MS, Twatter, et al, this is one of the few places where reading the comments by TF folks is often as good or better than Gen's posts.

One of the VERY few places on the net where most posts are thoughtful - or at least thought provoking. Personal anecdotes, opinions, and opposing points are generally very good here - not to mention, most posters can actually put a complete sentence together that is readable!

So you may not post much, but I come to TF for the comments as much as for the original posts by Gen.

----------
I just realized... they aren't saying, "Keynesian Economics"
they're saying "Kenyansian Economics". Grass Huts for everyone!
smiley
Welcome to historys first Double Dip Depression
Roundabout
Posts: 131
Incept: 2009-10-16

South Side of the Sky
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Lenguado,

Thanks for the insight, and I agree with you, the dialogue here is always thoughtful, thanks to our host for keeping it civilized. I was speaking from strictly personal perspective, that I tend to not comment often if I don't think I can add something to the conversation. I know you must have seen some forums where you can find endless verbal diarrhea (certainly not the case here) and I avoid those places (most of Reddit, for example).

I've always enjoyed the comments here also, and it really is one of the best things, I'm glad Karl has re-enabled comments on most of his posts. This is truly a place for thoughtful commentary, and I enjoy lurking more than posting. I think there must be many more like me - I'm sure Karl can see this in the stats, many more unique visitors than active posters. I wonder what the actual ratio is? It must be quite high, this is a very highly quoted website.
Tickerguy
Posts: 149426
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Quote:
I wonder what the actual ratio is?

Extremely high. Just hit "Top" for a decent look in the stats displayed at the bottom.

----------
Winding it down.
Roundabout
Posts: 131
Incept: 2009-10-16

South Side of the Sky
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Thanks, Karl.

According to today's stats so far:

369 signed-on persons have accessed the forum ( 15,582 anonymous ) from distinct IP addresses today.

So about 42X more people viewed the forum than signed in, and the number would be even higher regarding people posting vs. anonymous viewers. That's what makes this forum more interesting IMO, there's far less people posting than reading - but the ones that do post almost always have something thoughtful or interesting to say, Quality vs. quantity, plainly. Lots more readers than writers, and that's a good thing! Myself, I'll try to help keep that the case. I do visit here nearly every day, but only post occasionally. I hope the little bit I do say helps add to the conversation here.

Keep up the good work, Karl, it is appreciated by many, myself included.
Nonsensical
Posts: 111
Incept: 2017-06-16

Los Angeles, Ca
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Hello @nadavegan

Well, I'd argue that monopolies inherently corral, by definition even. And a government as well is inherently a monopoly. By forming a Constitutional republic we essentially say that we deem political rights to be a monopoly, thus anything that threatens that monopolistic position threatens those political rights. So, a concentration of wealth and power at some point threatens that political right monopoly. This is regardless of intent of the competing monopoly.

So I can't say if the tech leaders have nefarious intent. Likely it's a mixed bag like all things, some do, some don't, and some sometimes do and sometimes don't. However, that's beside the point, it's that they have accumulated or currently are accumulating a concentration of power that challenges the Constitutional monopoly.

This concentration isn't just in tech, all fields are concentrating, medical, airlines, meat packing, banking, car rental, grocery, drug stores, etc

I'd make some distinction between different companies. For example, let's take Amazon and Google. Yes, both are/were investing in drone technology. However, Google has shuttered that route and is going in the direction of high altitude balloons. This can pose a potential problem as this would position Google between ground relays and satellite relays.... We always think we're facing problems for the first time and somehow the Ancients were aware of these problems. Maybe not in their particulars, no, but in their generalities they were.

Consider this. The Athenian playwright, Aristophanes, writes a play called 'The Birds' in 414 BC. This is a play where two men convince the birds because they control the sky to set up a check point between the gods and the humans and thus charge for offerings from humans that pass through the sky to the gods, or to charge the gods passage through the sky as they came down from Olympus to Earth.

In any case, Google seems to have conceded the drone to Amazon.

In Amazon's case, no, I don't think they have any vision of drones flying all over the place going door to door. Of course you'd get something like this:



This led the government to recognize something called a 'natural monopoly'.

But that's not what I think Amazon is going for. I would guess that Amazon's drone program AND its purchase of Whole Foods is tied together. Whole Foods is positioned fairly well in affluent areas physically. Amazon doesn't want just groceries, they want the physical locations. Whole Foods can become Amazon stores or distribution centers. So you go into a store, they don't have the product you want, but they can get it in 20 minutes let's say. How? A drone flies that product from a store or distribution center that's in range. So they only need flying lanes, not the entire sky going door to door. Or they could drive the product door to door by hopping the product through drones from store to store of center to center.

And if Amazon can change the conversation of retail not being about products and distribution but about technology, perhaps then they get retail to be viewed as a problem of engineering...here come the intellectual property right injunctions.

For Google, it's a bit more complex because there's two forces at work in Google. The vision group and the monetization group. Page and Brin and others in Google have a vision, and that is Search, the complete organization of ALL information. I don't think they even care about the money, and if they did, they don't have to now. The monteization group of course wants the advertising money. So when it comes to data collection, in that regards their interests are aligned.

But it's the vision that ultimately will push things to the extreme. Because people are always intimately engaged to their own visions. The question though, is Larry Page's vision of the world, your vision, or even the majority of people's vision, and how does this vision interact with political rights (probably not well). Someone with a vision isn't going to stop, why would they? Of course they wouldn't, that's the point of having a vision of the world. This is just human nature, so we have safeguards to prevent this aspect of our nature from becoming tyrannical.

The real vital thing to recognize about monopolies is that it's not about intent, it's about the consequence that's inherent to its very existence.
Shannonlk1
Posts: 183
Incept: 2008-12-02

Raleigh
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
I'm late to the conversation, but here is my 2 cents. About Google and their obsession with search. If they have the majority using them for ALL search, they can then dictate what they see as well as WHAT THEY DON'T SEE. They don't like a website because of its political views, they just don't include it. They don't want specific news to get out? They leave those articles out. We already know they have started doing this. They are very much trying to control and direct what people think, no different than the media companies of the last 60 years. Its obvious, they think they are superior in every way, almost to the point they are gods(in their minds, this will not end well.

----------
Criminals thrive on the indulgence of Society's understanding.
Tickerguy
Posts: 149426
Incept: 2007-06-26
A True American Patriot!
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
All of these firms are stoppable quite easily. Of course there has to be sufficient desire to do so, and thus far there simply is not.

That which you consent to you cannot complain about.

----------
Winding it down.
Nonsensical
Posts: 111
Incept: 2017-06-16

Los Angeles, Ca
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Yes, exactly. It would take the Justice Department or the EU all of about 30 seconds to make their case because it's already been compiled. If someone tried to link all of the articles citing just Google and Amazon abusing their monopolistic position it'd probably overload the server.

But you don't need to demonstrate abuse or consumer benefit. Focusing on consumer benefit in terms of monopolies is NOT the law, it's an interpretation championed by Robert Bork. These companies not only admit to having overwhelming market share, they brag about it.

The evidence has been so compiled that every Attorney General at this point has a fiduciary duty to bring all of these companies to court. Jeff Sessions could do it, and the evidence has been so compiled already that it would still leave him a lot of time to lurk around the White House.

An aggressive justice department coupled with boycotting would be the end of it in less than a year (and saying aggressive is an exaggeration as just being pedestrian would still entail them bringing anti-trust law out). Sure, there will be dislocations, but we'd recover as other people fill in, and it's important to do it now while there's still people in a position to fill in.

Harass Chuck Schumer. His estimated net worth is under a million dollars, so it's not like he's rolling in dough, so if he wants to keep living it up on the tax payers then he better start doing the job he's benefiting from. Not just people in NY. You can pressure other Democrats and Republicans saying this guy is saying this, and if you don't start saying it I'm not voting for you.

There's two assumptions to not buy into so we don't drop our guard. 1. Don't assume that Schumer is speaking for the Democratic party (there's quite a few Democrats tied into the tech sector). And 2. don't assume the Democrats holding a minority position won't get anything done, because that's to assume that no Republican would jump on this particular cause.

And now Schumer can start writing follow up op-ed pieces telling us his plans and dropping names of who these monopolies are.

And those who believe in Bernie Sanders, if him not boycotting the DNC convention wasn't enough to disillusion you, I can't recall him talking about going after the more "popular" monopolies like Amazon and Google. A lot about the banks, but who doesn't say that.

If we are not at that point already, we're approaching it where someone like Larry Page has a good argument to make about people sharing his vision. Everything is in place to stop it, the only thing lacking is the will to execute it.

The irony is you can even use Google's Search to make a compelling case against Google Search. It's all out in the open. And what reason have we given them for them to not think they are superior?
Emg
Posts: 96
Incept: 2012-11-20

Canada
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
Google seems to be doing its best to stop itself right now. I know I'm not the only one moving away from all Google services after the recent news. I won't support a company that believes in firing people for talking about science.
Oldpool
Posts: 1172
Incept: 2010-06-23

LI NY
Report This As A Bad Post Add To Your Ignored User List
This is a follow the money situation with lemmings doing their thing on cue.

Why all of the sudden are all the monuments to the Civil war being removed?

Who is funding this surge in our cultural revolution?

If the original protesters were bused in, and I am guessing from both sides, than what we could be looking at is a beautifully orchestrated performance art designed to trigger those spontaneous attendees.

It seems plausible. I say follow the money for the answer something isn't right here.

----------
Liberty, Comrade!
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Showing Page 2 of 3  First123Last