←back to thread

The man who killed Google Search?

(www.wheresyoured.at)
1884 points elorant | 4 comments | 23 Apr 24 16:43 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
neilv ◴[23 Apr 24 17:48 UTC] No.40134839[source]▶
I think this article would work better if it were written entirely like textbook traditional investigative journalism. And less like the modern TV opinion personality, or the random strong-opinion Web comments in which many of the rest of us (including myself) indulge.
replies(8): >>40134879 #>>40135262 #>>40135594 #>>40135904 #>>40136387 #>>40136703 #>>40137636 #>>40138408 #
romanhn ◴[23 Apr 24 17:51 UTC] No.40134879[source]▶
Agreed. I struggled to keep going after "computer scientist class traitor". A very juvenile take that reflects poorly on the author, IMO.
replies(4): >>40135277 #>>40135352 #>>40137151 #>>40139031 #
akaij ◴[23 Apr 24 18:26 UTC] No.40135352[source]▶
I thought it was a very good description. The person mentioned is responsible for turning one of the most important pieces of software used by billions, into user-hostile experiences that's better for only a few, including himself, just for profits.
replies(2): >>40135450 #>>40137397 #
1. chasd00 ◴[23 Apr 24 21:18 UTC] No.40137397[source]▶
> ..just for profits.

well let's be honest, Google was never founded to dig wells or feed starving children. It was only ever for the profits.

Also, in their defense, afaik no one's paychecks have ever bounced. I bet many many people would become very interested in profit and its growth if their direct deposit all of a sudden stopped.

replies(3): >>40138070 #>>40140322 #>>40147403 #
2. akaij ◴[23 Apr 24 22:23 UTC] No.40138070[source]▶
I'm talking about the difference between making money off a good product, and being on a quest to enrich yourself at all costs, even if it's detrimental to virtually everyone on the planet, and the company in the long term.
3. barfbagginus ◴[24 Apr 24 03:47 UTC] No.40140322[source]▶
Hey since it's all for profits let's invent the version of Google where the computer has a robotic arm that puts a gun to your head and makes you watch ads for crypto currency arbitrage bot scams. If you don't click through it blows your brains out.

It's all for profit everything should be allowed for profit. Even really f*** awful products that hurt people and shouldn't exist... should be allowed for profit right? That's the line you're seemingly arguing.

4. fuzzfactor ◴[24 Apr 24 17:39 UTC] No.40147403[source]▶
Not my downvote. Corrective upvote actually.

>It was only ever for the profits.

Why not? But remember how they had a proven bonanza without having to be the least bit evil?

I know that's not enough for some people, so too bad.

>no one's paychecks have ever bounced.

I guess you could say that. Technically correct.

>their direct deposit all of a sudden stopped.

This appears to be what has actually happened to thousands, and may continue for some time.