Aka, Grandpa’s blog … An emotional purgative for our world's cultural excesses.
Wednesday, August 29, 2018
Obvious Trutth #1
If the world were as persistent in promoting capitalistic freedom as it has been in flitting with authoritative socialism, we would have a far happier and successful citizenry. -- Anon.
There is a case against unfettered capitalistic freedom creating wealthy barons while the wealth workers create does not return gains in their stagnant lives. There is a balance. And we are at a tipping point right now.
Google: Just because conservatives news sources are not at the top of searches isn't Google's fault. Maybe, individual user weighting preferences of news sources could extend the default algorithm. But I don't think they are being suppressed.
Facebook: A bit trickier as they are trying as eBay did years ago to rule out generally accepted crap like snuff, porn, organs, human traficking, and Nazi propaganda. No matter what they do, the freewheelin' days are over. But if you dislike something, don't follow it.
Twitter: Well, DJT himself is an example of what's good and bad there. If you do not like what comes through, don't follow it.
Amazon is a whole different world of retail diversificaton and technology. I don't think they are filtering except perhaps the smuttiest rankest stuff.
If they cash in now, sure. They played by the rules. Note that Facebook, Twitter, and Google do not get revenue from their users (surprisingly!) so the billions come from advertisers, and list buyers (like Cambridge Analytica did).
This flies in the face of your original thought from Anon. Sort of capitalistic socialism.
There is a case against unfettered capitalistic freedom creating wealthy barons while the wealth workers create does not return gains in their stagnant lives. There is a balance. And we are at a tipping point right now.
ReplyDeleteSo, Trump is right in putting his thumb on Google, Facebook and Twitter? And, if so, is Amazon next?
DeleteNo. And no.
ReplyDeleteGoogle: Just because conservatives news sources are not at the top of searches isn't Google's fault. Maybe, individual user weighting preferences of news sources could extend the default algorithm. But I don't think they are being suppressed.
Facebook: A bit trickier as they are trying as eBay did years ago to rule out generally accepted crap like snuff, porn, organs, human traficking, and Nazi propaganda. No matter what they do, the freewheelin' days are over. But if you dislike something, don't follow it.
Twitter: Well, DJT himself is an example of what's good and bad there. If you do not like what comes through, don't follow it.
Amazon is a whole different world of retail diversificaton and technology. I don't think they are filtering except perhaps the smuttiest rankest stuff.
So early investors and owners of these companies deserve their $billions? Which is it?
DeleteIf they cash in now, sure. They played by the rules. Note that Facebook, Twitter, and Google do not get revenue from their users (surprisingly!) so the billions come from advertisers, and list buyers (like Cambridge Analytica did).
DeleteThis flies in the face of your original thought from Anon. Sort of capitalistic socialism.