The internet is the new radio, and I don't want advertisers to control the whole ball of wax. It will destroy net neutrality.
Erm, what you want doesn't have anything to do with reality.
In this case the reality is that you can't do anything about it.
__________________
All opinions expressed in my posts are solely my own: I do not represent any other forums (of which I may or may not be a member), groups, or individuals although at times my views may resemble those of other entities.
******************************************
Inside every old man is a young man wondering WTF happened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Ohlsson
The appropriate role for science is the study of observed phenomena to gain an understanding. It is not dictating what people ought or ought not to be observing.
That's what I'm trying to say. Hypothetically speaking, if Google and Facebook are hellbent on dominating the internet, then they will also merge with any of the big media giants. Its a natural. Its inevitable if it continues on its course!
No they won't.
Radio didn't either.
The last thing that Google and Facebook want is to have to be responsible for the costs and risks of developing the content they exploit. They want it for free, or as close to free as they can get away with.
The last thing that Google and Facebook want is to have to be responsible for the costs and risks of developing the content they exploit. They want it for free, or as close to free as they can get away with.
Valid point. I don't disagree at all.
However it all plays out over the next ten years...or sooner...or later...I'm afraid the freewheelin' open internet, for good along with the bad, is gonna make way to just another dictatorial medium to a captive audience
Frankly I don't know much in depth about it except that it seemed to be legislation that, from what I understand, wanted to address copyright issues but the wording allowed for ridiculous consequences, hence all the screaming.
Sort of like, 'we want to watch out for terrorists, so we're going to listen to everyone's phone calls and install camera's in everyone's homes.'
The danger is, is that we have legislators who are generally ignorant over the very things they pass laws on so the corporate interests that obviously want everything stacked in their favor, have the money and influence to be in on the actual righting of legislation.
So what us schmucks get, is a big con job about how, on the face of it, it sounds good, but actually winds up being screwing everyone except the monied interests own power grab.
I wouldn't trust government or a corporation for the right time of day.
Yeah, but how can you live in the coolest country in the world and not trust the government on anything? Seems a little hypocritical.
All the way from Texas to Socal, baby. Trying to live the dream. Where are you?
Ah... thought you were in the UK for some reason.
I currently exist in my present form on long island. All dreams have been dashed, but hope springs eternal. Just want peace and quiet, to the pursue my interests, as far removed from all the insanity as I realistically can.
Location: In an undisclosed bunker working on the music of the next generation.
Posts: 511
Well the Internet is just a bunch of computers speaking common protocols. I don't share everyone cynicism about this. Controlling the Internet is very difficult, it's like trying to control the use of the English language. If you shut down the Internet, people will create darknets that effectively will become the new Internet. If you try to filter the Internet, people will route or proxy around the filters. You see this happen ALL the time.
Oh what am I kidding. Behold! The true nature of the Internet that Google and technologists have been hiding from you all along:
It's not so much 'the internet', but the mainstream, easily accessible internet that will be controlled.
It's already well on the way.
If the internet wasn't controlled, you'd be able to use Spotify without having to sign up to Facebook, a completely different product.
Location: In an undisclosed bunker working on the music of the next generation.
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso
It's not so much 'the internet', but the mainstream, easily accessible internet that will be controlled.
It's already well on the way.
If the internet wasn't controlled, you'd be able to use Spotify without having to sign up to Facebook, a completely different product.
That's like saying the Internet is controlled because I don't allow you to access files on my computer. Spotify is not the Internet, Spotify is a user of the Internet, just like you and me. Ditto for Facebook, Google, or Gearslutz.
I currently exist in my present form on long island. All dreams have been dashed, but hope springs eternal. Just want peace and quiet, to the pursue my interests, as far removed from all the insanity as I realistically can.
There are a lot of great musicians in Long Island.
Hell, Slipperman is from there... If he can do it, you can too.
"may the God's of Sunset Blvd look upon you kindly and with favor..."
That's a funny line. So true, and yet not true.
It is the artist that creates his own destiny in California.
you have much to learn... of the God's of Sunset Blvd... From Echo Park to the Pacific Ocean it weaves through the city as it's jugular vein, feeding dreams and heart break along every block and mile...
Frankly I don't know much in depth about it except that it seemed to be legislation that, from what I understand, wanted to address copyright issues but the wording allowed for ridiculous consequences, hence all the screaming.
In other words, like the majority of people who got suckered by the propaganda, you never bothered to read the bil, find out what it actually said, or determine what the real facts were.
You just bought the line that was peddled to you by the megacorporate enemies of artists and the music industry, hook, line, and sinker without even trying to make the barest attempt to find out the truth.
Thanks a f*cking lot.
Quote:
The danger is, is that we have legislators who are generally ignorant over the very things they pass laws on so the corporate interests that obviously want everything stacked in their favor, have the money and influence to be in on the actual righting of legislation.
How would you know? You just admitted that you never even bothered to read the bill.
The "corporate interests" WON in this case. Google spent more money on legal lobbying to defeat the bill than the total of what they ever spent before - and that's just the legal, registered lobbying, not the influence peddling through so-called "philanthropic" grants, donations, and the like through which they control so-called "independent" entities like Wikipedia, the EFF, The Harvard Law School, and Stanford.
Quote:
I wouldn't trust government or a corporation for the right time of day.
But, in reality, you do. You're parroting corporate propaganda right now.
I don't think the legislators are ignorant of the facts, circumstances and issues but they have their agendas. The things that become issues are those that the media publicizes. They are not necessarily the most significant issues or the ones that will effect our lives the most, they are made "public" for a variety of reasons however, importance and relevance are not very high on the list.
The result is that people think they are informed when in fact they are simply controlled. Legislators are no much different however, people with money, resources and employees that know how to use psychological techniques are the ones that get close the legislators and influence economics, law and policy.
How many legislators do you think are truly independent thinkers, well read and act in the best interest of the greatest number of people?
The answer is simple, the responsibility is on us to research and discover the facts. Notice how many people for instance, parrot the "Obamacare = socialism" bit when it is likely 99% of them don't know either what is in the healthcare bill or what socialism is. This is the heart of the problem. The same mechanism applies in the music industry. The government and moneyed interests are working hard to control and own the internet. Unless we are better informed and more knowledgable. They will succeed and it will be business as usual.
It is time to stand up and teach ourselves how to be citizens to each other. Not this silly patriotic banter that has people mindlessly following those they believe make them seem more righteous etc. etc. Patriotism is a concept that has been exploited to no end. If you don't think like the Tea Party A-Holes then you are not patriotic? REALLY??? They are the most arrogant, uninformed group of nuts going. That's not patriotism. Treating your neighbors and fellow citizens well is patriotism. Patriotism is supporting the culture or your nation. Not some outlandish adherence to ignorance disguised as "conservative' values.
I don't think the legislators are ignorant of the facts, circumstances and issues but they have their agendas. The things that become issues are those that the media publicizes. They are not necessarily the most significant issues or the ones that will effect our lives the most, they are made "public" for a variety of reasons however, importance and relevance are not very high on the list.
The result is that people think they are informed when in fact they are simply controlled. Legislators are no much different however, people with money, resources and employees that know how to use psychological techniques are the ones that get close the legislators and influence economics, law and policy.
How many legislators do you think are truly independent thinkers, well read and act in the best interest of the greatest number of people?
The answer is simple, the responsibility is on us to research and discover the facts. Notice how many people for instance, parrot the "Obamacare = socialism" bit when it is likely 99% of them don't know either what is in the healthcare bill or what socialism is. This is the heart of the problem. The same mechanism applies in the music industry. The government and moneyed interests are working hard to control and own the internet. Unless we are better informed and more knowledgable. They will succeed and it will be business as usual.
It is time to stand up and teach ourselves how to be citizens to each other. Not this silly patriotic banter that has people mindlessly following those they believe make them seem more righteous etc. etc. Patriotism is a concept that has been exploited to no end. If you don't think like the Tea Party A-Holes then you are not patriotic? REALLY??? They are the most arrogant, uninformed group of nuts going. That's not patriotism. Treating your neighbors and fellow citizens well is patriotism. Patriotism is supporting the culture or your nation. Not some outlandish adherence to ignorance disguised as "conservative' values.
Man oh man, will it ever end?
Good post, BUT -
We're really not supposed to discuss this stuff on Gearslutz.
All I'm gonna say about it is that most legislators in any society that has free elections have their jobs primarily because of their skill at winning popularity contests. Some never take it any farther than that. Some do.
@9:00 she mentions how everytime you Google and you click on something, a line is created in a database.
The data mining problem was concerned with handling all these lines.
Facebook and Twitter and Google etc, are all basically data gathering points. This data is what these companies
are really concerned with. if any company changes or folds, your data sets will still be the real asset.
this prior knowledge is used as a part of Bayesian inference in order to predict what we will do and
what we will like in the future. how we will be influenced by such and such an add in such and such
a context. etc. this is known as Prior · Posterior and so on.
so I guess that these ultra high speed servers and brand reputation management companies springing up,
use applications which high speed mine information regarding potential threats to Brand reputations and
then launch counter measures as quickly as possible.
as many of those people are employed on behalf of the Brand, then I suppose there is a valid question
as to the validity and authenticity to many claims being made about many products within blogs and forums etc.
as a result of this, there must be some guidelines and ethics drawn up as to how this reputation management
is carried out. in fact I believe there is. one being that any post or blog acting as an advocate of a Brand
needs to make clear their affiliation. This of course is not often the case with blogs who leverage add-sense
and multiple blogs in order to make profit from those adds being run.
as an example....
@9:00 she mentions how everytime you Google and you click on something, a line is created in a database.
The data mining problem was concerned with handling all these lines.
Facebook and Twitter and Google etc, are all basically data gathering points. This data is what these companies
are really concerned with. if any company changes or folds, your data sets will still be the real asset.
this prior knowledge is used as a part of Bayesian inference in order to predict what we will do and
what we will like in the future. how we will be influenced by such and such an add in such and such
a context. etc. this is known as Prior · Posterior and so on.
so I guess that these ultra high speed servers and brand reputation management companies springing up,
use applications which high speed mine information regarding potential threats to Brand reputations and
then launch counter measures as quickly as possible.
as many of those people are employed on behalf of the Brand, then I suppose there is a valid question
as to the validity and authenticity to many claims being made about many products within blogs and forums etc.
as a result of this, there must be some guidelines and ethics drawn up as to how this reputation management
is carried out. in fact I believe there is. one being that any post or blog acting as an advocate of a Brand
needs to make clear their affiliation. This of course is not often the case with blogs who leverage add-sense
and multiple blogs in order to make profit from those adds being run.
as an example....
CRM . customer relationship management
she mentions CRM @ 35:00
@Muser:
Unfortunately its a little late to create laws that stop this.
LIke I thought,the internet is the new wild west.
I had a conversation with a lawyer who specializes in internet law
and he basically said there are no laws limiting much of anything on the net
and thats why you have big companies trying to sue each other over all kinds of ownership claims.
Nice program that will tell you who is peaking in. I've been using it and it seems to be functioning quietly in the background, just recording the spy trails and allowing me to at least look at who the peeping toms are. No fix, but the information might be valuable in some way.
dan I think a lot of laws are really data privacy laws. but those laws are really
refering to companies who keep information. they are only allowed to sell or share that information
with another company or authority who also adhere to data protection standards.
that basically means that you or I can not get information on anyone or anything
which falls under that data protection law, (but) the companies or authorities (can).
so a government can sell your medical data to any other company for profit.
but you can't get information on anyone yourself. because those companies
will site data protection regulations as the reason not to give it to you.
I'd recommend to take the time to watch this video in total.
interesting how ringtones tend to bid the highest for the top add rankings.
if you search for lyrics for example, you often get a ringtone link with the lyrics.
about 20:00 in is a very interesting section. but it's all interesting.
dan I think a lot of laws are really data privacy laws. but those laws are really
refering to companies who keep information. they are only allowed to sell or share that information
with another company or authority who also adhere to data protection standards.
that basically means that you or I can not get information on anyone or anything
which falls under that data protection law, (but) the companies or authorities (can).
so a government can sell your medical data to any other company for profit.
but you can't get information on anyone yourself. because those companies
will site data protection regulations as the reason not to give it to you.
That's basically what data protection means.
WEll I understand what you are saying though big companies share plenty of personal data for corporate gain @ comsumer expense now more than ever.
so this would mean that google would only have rights to sell your searches to advertisers.
great!! then advertisers would be the only ones able to sell that data on to everyone else.
genius ... way to go Madison Avenue
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
