DOJ vs. Google evidence release that judge calls embarrassing exhibit [pdf]
justice.gov
justice.gov
"... we could mostly ignore the demand side of the equation (users and queries) ..."
In other words the people who use google search and what they want to know can mostly be ignored.
Instead the focus is on "advertisers" where advertiser is a euphemism for anyone who wants to target people for any purpose. This purpose can and does include disrupting our social order, promoting extremist causes, selling products that are unfit for use or products that are prohibitively expensive.
In case you have not been paying attention, welcome to clickbaitnet.
> probably from someone at google.
Specifically, it's "meeting notes that Google’s vice president for finance, Michael Roszak, created for a course on communications."
I’m guessing the actual scraping occurred much earlier than that though
Google’s lawyers should make the case that they can’t be trialled for monopoly on the search, because it’s one aspect that they don’t even do anymore.
Which is why it doesn't make much sense to call a middleman either one, when they're both.
We need to stop being shocked that the companies themselves, addicted to ad revenue, did some truly despicable things and most of the people at them (yes, many on this forum) actively enabled these behaviours and acted as apologists for them.
Seriously, fuck Google and fuck Meta and if your company is ad driven then it’s on you too.
I don’t think ads are really the “supply,” though.
This seems like one person writing down their personal observations, which are not super deep.
an exhibit, in this context, is a piece of evidence
this one was embarrassing for google
"DOJ vs Google evidence releases, which evidence judge calls embarrassing"
"DOJ v Google evidence release" is a noun phrase.
If you wanted to rewrite it as a sentence and weren't constrained by conventions used in headlines, you could rewrite it as, "Evidence released in DOJ v Google case includes an exhibit that the Judge called embarrassing [for Google]"
Even now it doesn't really make sense. This PDF is not an "evidence release", it is either evidence or a statement about released evidence. Unless that is a term of art in law?
Is it really that difficult?
[1] A garden-path sentence is one where you find at the end that the expected parsing is wrong. e.g. "The old man the boat" or "The horse raced past the barn fell". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden-path_sentence
It's a bad headline. There's no a complete sentence here. "DOJ vs. Google evidence release" is a noun phrase ("release" here is used as a noun), modified by the clause "that judge calls embarrassing exhibit". In that clause, "judge" is the subject, "calls" is the verb, "that" is the direct object, and "embarrassing exhibit" is an object compliment, which refers to the same thing as "that". So basically we just have a big noun phrase.
I run into these kinds of pages constantly as I try to debug common household issues (HVAC, electrical, automotive, etc.)
(I'd expect that high-quality, official webpages exist for queries like "Nest Thermostat G4CVZ operating manual" or "HVAC enthusiast forum." But that's not the case for a question like yours, and SEO spammers have fooled Google to become the best result.)
Not having to worry about the demand side of the equation == no interest in gaining the consent of the advertised to.
The advertising industry has a problem with consent.
Q.E.D.
I will not accept anyone who fundamentally tries to use platitudes to go "but it's just ads". No damnit. It's not "just ads". My answer is no, not only do you not ask, but when you go and do it anyway, you get pissy when I start blocking everything to do with you.
Anything that can be destroyed by the truth deserves to be destroyed by the truth.
To hell with Google, and to hell with web advertising. Let it all burn.
Web partitioning.
One is an indexed information retrieval system, purely intended to be a non-commercial/mercantile address space.
One is designed as essentially a business registry. You must be a business (in the legal fiction sense) to be a part. You can advertise to your heart's content in the mercantile web. In the non-mercantile, all toxic/polluting forms of SEO will be pruned with extreme prejudice.
The problem? There's no way in hell that there will not be low-key infiltration efforts by the mercantile side of things into the non-mercantile, simply because that'd be leaving money on the table. Further, the non-mercantile one will probably be so absurdly resource constrained as to eventually be subsumed by the mercantile Net in one way or another.
There's also still the problem of administrative authorities being pressured into intentional distortions of search indexes.
The first one kind of exists in various commercial forms but they are really expensive. Would your version be a kind of public utility?
The reason I architected things that way was because I strongly believe that the best way to bootstrap network savvy for the widest possible audience is to bootstrap off of ways of life everyone no exceptions can relate to. Road systems are the prototypical network we all end up learning from.
By mirroring civil infrastructure, you can also cultivate an appreciation and awareness w.r.t network traffic, and propagation in and out of a space. You essentially end up, with local groups of network operators able to coop to keep their surrounds operational.
If this is sounding a lot like municipal networking, that's cause it is. Networks should be the realm of communities, and not seperable by mere financial accident.
The bloody business only net would reside in what I call "the remote net" which is basically the net we have now, completely divorced from any type of local geographical constraints. The reason for it not to the necessarily "default net" is to specifically allow for things like a community engageable desync from the web at large if necessary, because back then, I was far more interested in empowering groups of people living together to coordinate amongst themselves uninterrupted rather than faciliatating top down control by "remote zones" of local nets, like you see starting to materialize today in the form of the practice of deplatforming.
A new arrival (child's) onboarding process to the world would basically simplify down to one simple practice: learn to navigate and travel the real physical world, adding on increasing scopes and breadths of access as they can handle it. The shift toward algorithmic thinking, and getting an intuition for navigating these networks would just materialize in the same way that one learns ones neighborhood, local library, local municipality, next town over, etc.
The final net gain, har har, is that one could over time basically decentralize every form of networked interaction.
Yeah, it's pretty naive as *f given today's world. But the idea of Nets of data ever widening in scope, preserving data associated with the local inhabitants over time at least provides a framework of organization for any locality, or handful inhabitants to organize themselves with, and most importantly, express their own digital sovereignty with (which includes individuals setting up straight to remote grid connections, bypassing the local grid systems entirely).
It was really more of a passion of getting the onramp to global networking a bit more navigable to the less tech inclined, and creating abstraction layers whereby municipalities can more effectively protect community subnetworks in some fashion.