Re: Re: Re: Conservatives lack the ability to turn shit off
The religious party is not against abortion, or contraception, or gay marriage. The religious party is against SEX - the political issues are just the expression of that position.
That's been my take on it. The hot buttons all revolve around sex.
I respect someone who values all life and believes abortions are wrong. However, if you have that belief system, I would assume you would also be against the death penalty and war. And one would hope you would also be against any environmental hazards which might damage unborn children.
Suzanne, would you agree with me if I said that both major parties at the presidential race level are fairly screwed up at this point?
I plan to vote. I always vote. But I am quite disgusted with American politics at the national level right now (it's not so bad here in Boulder). I don't have a TV so I am spared many of the ads, but the media coverage is nearly as bad because they cover every nasty/stupid thing one politician says about the other.
My biggest complaint is lies. My second biggest complaint is that voters aren't likely to get the country they think they are voting for. The world is complex and there are no easy fixes.
Why do "they", Governments MPAA, RIAA, think they can stop the unstoppable. How is that war on drugs going.
There have been some interesting articles about the world's underground economy. Transactions that occur off the books because what is going on is either illegal or the right permits/taxes/bribes haven't been paid.
That's the irony of some laws. By making some things illegal, it opens the door to those willing to take those risks. The drug war is a great example. The people dealing in drugs make huge margins plus there is a huge industry to maintain those laws (e.g., prisons, border patrols).
When I get depressed about the direction of the US economy, I try to perk myself up by saying we're doing well for a Third World country. If enough safety nets collapse, we could see more people living day-to-day, squatting, scavenging, etc.
I saw this a few days ago.
Unilever sees 'return to poverty' in Europe - Telegraph: In Spain, the company sells Surf detergent in packages for as few as five washes, while in Greece, it now offers mashed potatoes and mayonnaise in small packages, and has created a low-cost brand for basic goods such as tea and olive oil.
"In Indonesia, we sell individual packs of shampoo 2 to 3 cents and still make decent money," said Mr Zijderveld. "We know how to do that, but in Europe we have forgotten in the years before the crisis."
Many Republicans want just as much government as they accuse Democrats of implementing. They just want government to do different things. They want laws saying which religions are acceptable, what language you can speak, who you can marry, etc.
The small government proclamation is just a diversionary tactic.
But in response to an order from the judge presiding over the case, the web giant has provided a list of individuals and groups who have commented on the case and have received money from the company, including Google attorney William Patry, Java creator James Gosling, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
“Pursuant to the [judge's order], the required disclosure does not include advertising revenue, disclosed experts, or gifts to universities,” Google said in a court filing on Friday. “It does, however, include ‘all commenters known by Google to have received payments as consultants, contractors, vendors, or employees’ and employee-commenters at organizations who receive money from Google.”
Here's another example. This is the sort of thing many bloggers do. If you have some sort of connection with what/who you are writing about, you say so.
Techdirt and the value of the velvet rope approach to media — Tech News and Analysis: "The site, which is run by founder Mike Masnick through a company called Floor 64 (Full disclosure: I consider Masnick a friend) has had an online store for some time now where readers and fans could come and buy the usual type of swag many publishers offer, including e-books based on the site’s coverage. But the store has now been updated with some new features, including the ability to buy lunch with Masnick (for $250) and to do a Google Hangout with him."
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
Mike did make such a statement in the comments, though I can't find it now. But since you remember him saying that he used Google's facilities once, I guess you remember that he made that statement.
I only remember him saying he used Google for an event. I've never seen any comments from him about whether Google has been a client or if he and Google have had any business dealings, etc. Has he actually said this or have you interpreted what he has written to mean this?
The plain fact is that you, Suzanne, invented this "relationship" out of whole cloth.
Mike started this shill thread. Blame him for bringing it up.
What I have commented on is the fact that (1) I find Techdirt more Google-centric than other anti-IP blogs and (2) the fact that all bloggers are questioned about the relationships with the companies they write about. You don't seem to get that. Nearly every blogger who writes about tech is challenged about their relationships. For anyone to think Mike shouldn't get scrutiny is naive.
What I find odd is that you don't understand this. Because Mike has been a consultant in Silicon Valley, I would find it strange for him not to have dealt with Google, but perhaps that has been the case. Has there been a complete list of Floor64 clients posted anywhere?
There have been so many posts all over the Internet about which bloggers are mouthpieces for which companies that it has been inevitable for such talk to hit Techdirt as well.
This blog post is about shilling for Google. I am addressing that issue. These days any blogger that doesn't bend over backwards to describe his relationship or lack of relationship with a company he writes about comes under scrutiny. It goes with the territory. Techdirt is not immune or protected from that, nor is any other blog.
I'm just trying to explain the state of blogging today. Say whatever you want about me. It doesn't change perceptions of bloggers and their relationships with the companies they write about.
There is so much on this topic that I won't cite much. Here are the results of a quick search to give you a sample.
Required FTC blogger disclosure - Overlawyered: "After all, the rules (to be precise, 'guidelines' backed by government lawyers with relevant enforcement powers) make clear that nondisclosure of a single minor freebie will not in itself suffice to trigger liability but instead will be counted 'among several factors to be weighed' in evaluating the continuum of behavior by individuals engaging in social media (it seems the rules also apply to Twitter, Facebook, and guest appearances on talk shows, to name a few). FTC enforcers will engage in their own fact-specific, and inevitably subjective, balancing before deciding whether to press for fines or other penalties: in other words, instead of knowing whether you’re legally vulnerable or not, you get to guess."
It means you need to write a blog disclosure policy.
What if you have nothing to disclose? (Pity the fool who has nothing to disclose.)
No matter. Write one anyways. A blog disclosure policy is an opportunity to demonstrate your character. It is an opportunity to sell your character and even your soul.
Because what else have you got to offer, really?
Your blog disclosure policy is a vehicle for soul-selling, storyselling, storytelling, and maybe even making some cold hard cash – even if you’re not there yet."
Steve Jobs Vindicated, Google Next Target - Seeking Alpha: "Disclosure: I am long AAPL, MSFT. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article."
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
I am going to assume you are single as no man would want to prove to you every-time he came home that they had not been with another woman.
You don't know just how close you are to the messages being sent to women: Don't get drunk, keep your legs together, watch how you dress, don't go into certain neighborhoods, watch who you hang out with, don't give strangers your phone number.
At any rate, you guys can keep protesting that suspecting bloggers of getting paid is unfair, but it is so common that it's not even up for debate among people who follow these discussions.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
That's the nature of the blogosphere these days. There have been enough deals and influence peddling that unless a blogger states, "I have never received ANYTHING from company X," the assumption is there that something has taken place whenever there is a favorable blog.
Every blogger is under suspicion. You guys may not like that, but that's how it is now. It's kind of like Lance Armstrong saying, "I've never tested positive for anything." That's not quite the same as saying "I've never used any performance enhancing drugs."
And, in addition, there's a lot of gaming of the Internet. We have people who buy followers and friends. So yes, it does tend to be assumed guilty until proven otherwise.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
There is no "deal" here. There is no "relationship with the company" to speculate on.
People are going to speculate unless there is a statement from Mike saying there has never been an exchange of money or freebies. Any tech blogger that writes about matters that tend to reinforce a particular company is subject to speculation. Happens all the time.
I think it is an interesting topic. I didn't start it. But since Mike brought up the concept of shilling for Google, I'm happy to explore just what "shilling" might mean and why people think there may be a connection between Techdirt and Google.
How taking money or freebies influences bloggers is a huge topic, so I'm not covering anything that hasn't been discussed in depth other places. Every blogger is subject to speculation about what they have or haven't gotten from the companies, artists, etc., that they write about.
Another thing I will point out is a possible solution is "buyer beware." That does work, but if enough people become wary, consumption goes down. Of course, there is the reverse benefit where people who don't trust companies they don't know don't buy from them, but will exclusively deal with companies they do know. That sort of mentality is giving a boost to localization.
Somehow the leap in logic is that the sleaziest company wins in an unregulated capitalist market. While there are plenty of arguments for government regulation, this isn't a very good one. Quality products often do far better in the marketplace regardless of regulations, no matter how much sleazy competition is out there. Because consumers want products that work.
In some cases we depend on a testing entity to verify that the product we want is what we are actually paying for. The government doesn't have to do it, but it seems like that in terms of products it hard to verify, the government has stepped. Often not initially but because other protection systems have failed.
With online rating systems, it is becoming easier for people to red-flag cons, but there are still some glitches. Health care products where consumers aren't aware of whether they are getting what they expect or not is one issue. Sure, eventually the frauds may be caught, but in the meantime people may have died.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
In any case, when any company has paid Techdirt for anything, Mike has always stated it upfront. He always reveals his sponsors for e.g. TED talks, speaking engagements, Insight Community conversations, etc.
That's what I am trying to point out. You can do selective disclosure and make it look like full disclosure. Unless you say, "Google has NEVER paid me or given me anything," there can be speculation about your relationship with the company because that is how deals are done in many cases.
If you are around politicians and business people long enough, you learn that some things are made public and some things aren't and there are ways to spin lots of stuff in your favor.
Think about all of those freebies you get at conventions. Yes, they are trying to influence you. Maybe you are influenced and maybe you aren't. If it is a dollar toy, it probably isn't worth citing. If it is something worth $200+, it might be worth citing if you are writing about the company or if you are asking your own company to do business with the giving company. It happens all the time overseas in the form of bribes. It's an interesting topic and one I think worthy of discussion here.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
Mike is not focused on whether "tech solves all problems." He's mainly interested in how businesses (including content creators) should adapt to market changes caused by disruptive technology, which in our lifetimes is the Internet.
Yes, I don't find Techdirt disruptive enough. In terms of music, I think the Internet has disrupted the arts, but I don't think the solution is to tell artists to sell more stuff. Why don't I think that? Because I look at incomes, particularly among younger consumers, and I don't see the funds there to support the arts and artists. (A significant percentage are consumers who are living at home because they are underemployed and heavily in debt.) Therefore, I think we need much more expansive thinking in terms of how everyone gets supported.
I have been lately reading about the increased use of robots, which has resulted in job layoffs. Yes, technology has traditionally resulted in new, better paying jobs, but the speed at which it is being adopted is perhaps faster than we can adjust. Therefore, we might need to look at different economic systems based on new realities. It's as significant as the Industrial Revolution.
As long as people don't mind that I will not necessarily embrace some of the thinking here, I will keep posting on a few topics and will sometimes offer alternative view points.
As for why I got involved in this discussion, it's because (1) I do see Techdirt as Google-centric and (2) I know how the media tends to work in terms of payments, sponsorships, freebies, etc. There are reasons why some people have assumed Mike has gotten payment from Google. I'm just pointing out why people might think that. Maybe he has gone on record to say he has never received anything from Google, but I haven't been able to find it, though I have looked.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
In terms of Mike, he hasn't actually said he hasn't received money or perks from Google.
Yes, he has.
Could you provide a link? I've done searches and could never find it. Has he actually said, "I have never been paid by Google for anything?" I know he has used their facilities for an event and he has said that. But has he said there have been no other exchanges of money, freebies, etc.?
Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
I guess that means you're a shill for Google too?
Among big tech companies, Google is the one I like the second best (I think Amazon is probably my first choice because it isn't trying to monitor everything I do). If that makes me a Google shill, so be it.
I know that the tech companies aren't a united block. I have enjoyed the various legal battles they are inflicting on each other as a way to keep them in check.
But in terms of thinking that tech solves all problems and that the Silicon Valley way of thinking is better than what comes from other industries or places, yes, I see a mindset and power influence settling in. I do see tech solving some problems (I hope technology knocks out fossil fuels and its infrastructure as soon as possible), but I roll my eyes at some of what is written by Silicon Valley-mindset bloggers. They sound so much like defenders of old industries used to sound.
What I like about the P2P Foundation is that it has proposed using the connectivity of the Internet to break down old corporate structures. It is looking for solutions that truly put the power at the grassroots level. It is quite anti-corporate. Silicon Valley is not anti-corporate. In fact, most of the people there seem to be hoping to make money by growing big companies that can generate a lot of money for them.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
You know, I am totally open to any of you asking me if my opinions reflect any past relationships with companies (I'm intentionally not taking money from anyone right now, so all relationships would be in the past). That's been my point. If you want to follow my dots to see my influences, I'm happy to provide that info.
In terms of Mike, he hasn't actually said he hasn't received money or perks from Google. He has disclosed some, but hasn't gone on record about any others. Fans of his have assumed the only relationships are the ones that he has disclosed, but as far as I can tell, he hasn't said that there haven't been other relationships with Google. And that's been my point. Many bloggers do have connections with companies they cover. Sometimes they disclose that and sometimes they don't.
At any rate, I think I have clarified my stance on things. I consider Techdirt to be Google-centric when compared to many other sites writing about economic issues. Whether that is coincidental or reflects a more formal arrangement with Google doesn't really matter to me. But if I want to see discussions on a wider range of issues, I have found other sites to be better. Some of the ones I enjoy are far more radical than Techdirt concerning IP laws and how they impact business and ownership.
On the post: GOP Platform May Include Internet Freedom Language... But Also Wants Crackdown On Internet Porn
Re: Re: Re: Conservatives lack the ability to turn shit off
That's been my take on it. The hot buttons all revolve around sex.
I respect someone who values all life and believes abortions are wrong. However, if you have that belief system, I would assume you would also be against the death penalty and war. And one would hope you would also be against any environmental hazards which might damage unborn children.
On the post: GOP Platform May Include Internet Freedom Language... But Also Wants Crackdown On Internet Porn
Re: Re: It's never been about smaller government
I plan to vote. I always vote. But I am quite disgusted with American politics at the national level right now (it's not so bad here in Boulder). I don't have a TV so I am spared many of the ads, but the media coverage is nearly as bad because they cover every nasty/stupid thing one politician says about the other.
My biggest complaint is lies. My second biggest complaint is that voters aren't likely to get the country they think they are voting for. The world is complex and there are no easy fixes.
On the post: GOP Platform May Include Internet Freedom Language... But Also Wants Crackdown On Internet Porn
Re:
There have been some interesting articles about the world's underground economy. Transactions that occur off the books because what is going on is either illegal or the right permits/taxes/bribes haven't been paid.
That's the irony of some laws. By making some things illegal, it opens the door to those willing to take those risks. The drug war is a great example. The people dealing in drugs make huge margins plus there is a huge industry to maintain those laws (e.g., prisons, border patrols).
When I get depressed about the direction of the US economy, I try to perk myself up by saying we're doing well for a Third World country. If enough safety nets collapse, we could see more people living day-to-day, squatting, scavenging, etc.
I saw this a few days ago.
Unilever sees 'return to poverty' in Europe - Telegraph: In Spain, the company sells Surf detergent in packages for as few as five washes, while in Greece, it now offers mashed potatoes and mayonnaise in small packages, and has created a low-cost brand for basic goods such as tea and olive oil.
"In Indonesia, we sell individual packs of shampoo 2 to 3 cents and still make decent money," said Mr Zijderveld. "We know how to do that, but in Europe we have forgotten in the years before the crisis."
On the post: GOP Platform May Include Internet Freedom Language... But Also Wants Crackdown On Internet Porn
It's never been about smaller government
The small government proclamation is just a diversionary tactic.
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Here's how Wired put it
Google Outs List of People Not Paid to Comment on Oracle Suit | Wired Enterprise | Wired.com: Google has reiterated that it has not paid any authors, journalists, commentators, or bloggers to report or comment on its legal battle with Oracle over the Android mobile operating system.
But in response to an order from the judge presiding over the case, the web giant has provided a list of individuals and groups who have commented on the case and have received money from the company, including Google attorney William Patry, Java creator James Gosling, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
“Pursuant to the [judge's order], the required disclosure does not include advertising revenue, disclosed experts, or gifts to universities,” Google said in a court filing on Friday. “It does, however, include ‘all commenters known by Google to have received payments as consultants, contractors, vendors, or employees’ and employee-commenters at organizations who receive money from Google.”
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Re: This is a typical disclosure
Techdirt and the value of the velvet rope approach to media — Tech News and Analysis: "The site, which is run by founder Mike Masnick through a company called Floor 64 (Full disclosure: I consider Masnick a friend) has had an online store for some time now where readers and fans could come and buy the usual type of swag many publishers offer, including e-books based on the site’s coverage. But the store has now been updated with some new features, including the ability to buy lunch with Masnick (for $250) and to do a Google Hangout with him."
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
I only remember him saying he used Google for an event. I've never seen any comments from him about whether Google has been a client or if he and Google have had any business dealings, etc. Has he actually said this or have you interpreted what he has written to mean this?
The plain fact is that you, Suzanne, invented this "relationship" out of whole cloth.
Mike started this shill thread. Blame him for bringing it up.
What I have commented on is the fact that (1) I find Techdirt more Google-centric than other anti-IP blogs and (2) the fact that all bloggers are questioned about the relationships with the companies they write about. You don't seem to get that. Nearly every blogger who writes about tech is challenged about their relationships. For anyone to think Mike shouldn't get scrutiny is naive.
What I find odd is that you don't understand this. Because Mike has been a consultant in Silicon Valley, I would find it strange for him not to have dealt with Google, but perhaps that has been the case. Has there been a complete list of Floor64 clients posted anywhere?
There have been so many posts all over the Internet about which bloggers are mouthpieces for which companies that it has been inevitable for such talk to hit Techdirt as well.
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Re: Re: This is a typical disclosure
I'm just trying to explain the state of blogging today. Say whatever you want about me. It doesn't change perceptions of bloggers and their relationships with the companies they write about.
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Re: This is a typical disclosure
Required FTC blogger disclosure - Overlawyered: "After all, the rules (to be precise, 'guidelines' backed by government lawyers with relevant enforcement powers) make clear that nondisclosure of a single minor freebie will not in itself suffice to trigger liability but instead will be counted 'among several factors to be weighed' in evaluating the continuum of behavior by individuals engaging in social media (it seems the rules also apply to Twitter, Facebook, and guest appearances on talk shows, to name a few). FTC enforcers will engage in their own fact-specific, and inevitably subjective, balancing before deciding whether to press for fines or other penalties: in other words, instead of knowing whether you’re legally vulnerable or not, you get to guess."
A Screamingly Effective Blog Disclosure Policy: How (and Why) To Get One : @ProBlogger: "What does the recent FTC announcement mean for a humble, professional, freebie-accepting, affiliate-pimping, mostly-broke blogger eking out pennies or flats of free soda per post?
It means you need to write a blog disclosure policy.
What if you have nothing to disclose? (Pity the fool who has nothing to disclose.)
No matter. Write one anyways. A blog disclosure policy is an opportunity to demonstrate your character. It is an opportunity to sell your character and even your soul.
Because what else have you got to offer, really?
Your blog disclosure policy is a vehicle for soul-selling, storyselling, storytelling, and maybe even making some cold hard cash – even if you’re not there yet."
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
This is a typical disclosure
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
You don't know just how close you are to the messages being sent to women: Don't get drunk, keep your legs together, watch how you dress, don't go into certain neighborhoods, watch who you hang out with, don't give strangers your phone number.
At any rate, you guys can keep protesting that suspecting bloggers of getting paid is unfair, but it is so common that it's not even up for debate among people who follow these discussions.
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
Every blogger is under suspicion. You guys may not like that, but that's how it is now. It's kind of like Lance Armstrong saying, "I've never tested positive for anything." That's not quite the same as saying "I've never used any performance enhancing drugs."
And, in addition, there's a lot of gaming of the Internet. We have people who buy followers and friends. So yes, it does tend to be assumed guilty until proven otherwise.
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
People are going to speculate unless there is a statement from Mike saying there has never been an exchange of money or freebies. Any tech blogger that writes about matters that tend to reinforce a particular company is subject to speculation. Happens all the time.
I think it is an interesting topic. I didn't start it. But since Mike brought up the concept of shilling for Google, I'm happy to explore just what "shilling" might mean and why people think there may be a connection between Techdirt and Google.
How taking money or freebies influences bloggers is a huge topic, so I'm not covering anything that hasn't been discussed in depth other places. Every blogger is subject to speculation about what they have or haven't gotten from the companies, artists, etc., that they write about.
On the post: Pen vs. Pen: Dealing With A Copycat By Naming & Shaming
Re: Re: Re: Same excrement 'nother sol
On the post: Pen vs. Pen: Dealing With A Copycat By Naming & Shaming
Re: Re: Same excrement 'nother sol
In some cases we depend on a testing entity to verify that the product we want is what we are actually paying for. The government doesn't have to do it, but it seems like that in terms of products it hard to verify, the government has stepped. Often not initially but because other protection systems have failed.
With online rating systems, it is becoming easier for people to red-flag cons, but there are still some glitches. Health care products where consumers aren't aware of whether they are getting what they expect or not is one issue. Sure, eventually the frauds may be caught, but in the meantime people may have died.
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
That's what I am trying to point out. You can do selective disclosure and make it look like full disclosure. Unless you say, "Google has NEVER paid me or given me anything," there can be speculation about your relationship with the company because that is how deals are done in many cases.
If you are around politicians and business people long enough, you learn that some things are made public and some things aren't and there are ways to spin lots of stuff in your favor.
Think about all of those freebies you get at conventions. Yes, they are trying to influence you. Maybe you are influenced and maybe you aren't. If it is a dollar toy, it probably isn't worth citing. If it is something worth $200+, it might be worth citing if you are writing about the company or if you are asking your own company to do business with the giving company. It happens all the time overseas in the form of bribes. It's an interesting topic and one I think worthy of discussion here.
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
Yes, I don't find Techdirt disruptive enough. In terms of music, I think the Internet has disrupted the arts, but I don't think the solution is to tell artists to sell more stuff. Why don't I think that? Because I look at incomes, particularly among younger consumers, and I don't see the funds there to support the arts and artists. (A significant percentage are consumers who are living at home because they are underemployed and heavily in debt.) Therefore, I think we need much more expansive thinking in terms of how everyone gets supported.
I have been lately reading about the increased use of robots, which has resulted in job layoffs. Yes, technology has traditionally resulted in new, better paying jobs, but the speed at which it is being adopted is perhaps faster than we can adjust. Therefore, we might need to look at different economic systems based on new realities. It's as significant as the Industrial Revolution.
As long as people don't mind that I will not necessarily embrace some of the thinking here, I will keep posting on a few topics and will sometimes offer alternative view points.
As for why I got involved in this discussion, it's because (1) I do see Techdirt as Google-centric and (2) I know how the media tends to work in terms of payments, sponsorships, freebies, etc. There are reasons why some people have assumed Mike has gotten payment from Google. I'm just pointing out why people might think that. Maybe he has gone on record to say he has never received anything from Google, but I haven't been able to find it, though I have looked.
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
Yes, he has.
Could you provide a link? I've done searches and could never find it. Has he actually said, "I have never been paid by Google for anything?" I know he has used their facilities for an event and he has said that. But has he said there have been no other exchanges of money, freebies, etc.?
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
Among big tech companies, Google is the one I like the second best (I think Amazon is probably my first choice because it isn't trying to monitor everything I do). If that makes me a Google shill, so be it.
I know that the tech companies aren't a united block. I have enjoyed the various legal battles they are inflicting on each other as a way to keep them in check.
But in terms of thinking that tech solves all problems and that the Silicon Valley way of thinking is better than what comes from other industries or places, yes, I see a mindset and power influence settling in. I do see tech solving some problems (I hope technology knocks out fossil fuels and its infrastructure as soon as possible), but I roll my eyes at some of what is written by Silicon Valley-mindset bloggers. They sound so much like defenders of old industries used to sound.
What I like about the P2P Foundation is that it has proposed using the connectivity of the Internet to break down old corporate structures. It is looking for solutions that truly put the power at the grassroots level. It is quite anti-corporate. Silicon Valley is not anti-corporate. In fact, most of the people there seem to be hoping to make money by growing big companies that can generate a lot of money for them.
On the post: Apparently I'm A Google Shill And I Didn't Even Know It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: To be on Google's short list probably is noteworthy
In terms of Mike, he hasn't actually said he hasn't received money or perks from Google. He has disclosed some, but hasn't gone on record about any others. Fans of his have assumed the only relationships are the ones that he has disclosed, but as far as I can tell, he hasn't said that there haven't been other relationships with Google. And that's been my point. Many bloggers do have connections with companies they cover. Sometimes they disclose that and sometimes they don't.
At any rate, I think I have clarified my stance on things. I consider Techdirt to be Google-centric when compared to many other sites writing about economic issues. Whether that is coincidental or reflects a more formal arrangement with Google doesn't really matter to me. But if I want to see discussions on a wider range of issues, I have found other sites to be better. Some of the ones I enjoy are far more radical than Techdirt concerning IP laws and how they impact business and ownership.
Next >>