Google is just one of many ways to access the internet. The only way to emulate the world before Google would be to shut down the entire internet, because we've had search engines as long as we've had the internet - they go together.
To say that something exists but you can't find it is the same as making it go away entirely. It's blatant censorship both ways. If you're fine with censoring Google search results, then you're fine with deleting the original content - but you can't because that's against the law. Censoring Google is just an attempt to get around the law.
If it's not against the law, then go after the offending content, not the thing pointing it out. All this law does is break Google from doing what it's supposed to do. It makes the internet less useful for everyone on the planet for the benefit of one person.
Just like in real life, you have no right to control what other people know about you, think about you, or remember about you once that information is made public, because it impinges on the rights of others.
The question remains: Why force Google to ignore the content? Why force the search engine into this situation? Why not ask the person actually hosting the actual content to remove it?
The problem is that Google didn't publish this information, so why are they responsible for it? Why is Google the focus of the law and why must they devote their resources to other people's problems? How many times must it be explained that Google is not the internet.
In short, why not make the people who actually published the information take it down?
So you try and convince people who might have a conscience to quit their jobs so they can be replaced by people who have less empathy for travelers and the ridiculous policies of the TSA.
Live broadcast TV (and cable) was once essential to American society. It isn't anymore. Modern society can function just fine without it.
Today the internet is essential to American society, mainly because it gives everyone a voice, and not just the few people privileged enough to be able to broadcast.
Tell the average Joe they can't see the movie they want because of licensing negotiations and they're not going to have much sympathy. They're just going to pirate.
The only reason it takes so long is because they make the licensing so complicated to begin with. It's middle management at its worst and it's nothing to applaud. The industry should have taken the lead with this years ago, but instead they had to be dragged kicking and screaming.
And what did they end up with? Netflix runs the show and keeps all the precious streaming data while the studios were worried about losing Blockbuster's business.
I can walk into any store that sells DVDs and expect to find all the latest top titles for sale. Any store!
But I can't pay for any streaming service and find the latest top titles available to watch.
This is the problem.
They're making it so I have to shop at multiple stores just to find the movies I want to see. Imagine wanting to see the latest blockbuster movie, and having to figure out if it was being sold at Walmart, or Target, or Best Buy, or Barnes and Noble, and having to do this for every single movie.
They hate anything new until someone clever figures out how to make a ton of money from it. Then it becomes their precious business model and they will fight anything that threatens it. It's been an ongoing cycle for over 100 years.
On the post: Right To Be Forgotten Hits The NY Times
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: How Google Works
Google is just one of many ways to access the internet. The only way to emulate the world before Google would be to shut down the entire internet, because we've had search engines as long as we've had the internet - they go together.
To say that something exists but you can't find it is the same as making it go away entirely. It's blatant censorship both ways. If you're fine with censoring Google search results, then you're fine with deleting the original content - but you can't because that's against the law. Censoring Google is just an attempt to get around the law.
If it's not against the law, then go after the offending content, not the thing pointing it out. All this law does is break Google from doing what it's supposed to do. It makes the internet less useful for everyone on the planet for the benefit of one person.
Just like in real life, you have no right to control what other people know about you, think about you, or remember about you once that information is made public, because it impinges on the rights of others.
On the post: Right To Be Forgotten Hits The NY Times
Re: Re: Re: How Google Works
On the post: Twitter Sues The US Government For The Right To Disclose Surveillance Requests
Re:
On the post: Right To Be Forgotten Hits The NY Times
Re:
In short, why not make the people who actually published the information take it down?
On the post: 5,000 Domains Seized Based On Sealed Court Filing; Confused Domain Owners Have No Idea Why
Re:
On the post: CIA Inspector General Can't Find A Single Example Of CIA Overclassification
On the post: Google Removes News Snippets From Complaining Publications In Germany; Publications Claim It's 'Blackmail'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Control
On the post: TSA Kangaroo Court Rubber Stamps TSA Fining Guy Who Stripped Naked, Completely Dismissing Court Ruling Finding It Legal
Re: TSA
On the post: Google Removes News Snippets From Complaining Publications In Germany; Publications Claim It's 'Blackmail'
Re: Control
On the post: Not Just Consumers Cutting The TV Cord: Small Cable Companies Dropping TV Also
Re: Streaming is great, but live TV is key
Today the internet is essential to American society, mainly because it gives everyone a voice, and not just the few people privileged enough to be able to broadcast.
On the post: Not Just Consumers Cutting The TV Cord: Small Cable Companies Dropping TV Also
Re:
On the post: MPAA Tries To Ignore The Fact That The Study It Paid For Reveals Very Few Top Films Are Available On Netflix
Re: Re:
On the post: MPAA Tries To Ignore The Fact That The Study It Paid For Reveals Very Few Top Films Are Available On Netflix
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The only reason it takes so long is because they make the licensing so complicated to begin with. It's middle management at its worst and it's nothing to applaud. The industry should have taken the lead with this years ago, but instead they had to be dragged kicking and screaming.
And what did they end up with? Netflix runs the show and keeps all the precious streaming data while the studios were worried about losing Blockbuster's business.
On the post: MPAA Tries To Ignore The Fact That The Study It Paid For Reveals Very Few Top Films Are Available On Netflix
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
But I can't pay for any streaming service and find the latest top titles available to watch.
This is the problem.
They're making it so I have to shop at multiple stores just to find the movies I want to see. Imagine wanting to see the latest blockbuster movie, and having to figure out if it was being sold at Walmart, or Target, or Best Buy, or Barnes and Noble, and having to do this for every single movie.
On the post: MPAA Tries To Ignore The Fact That The Study It Paid For Reveals Very Few Top Films Are Available On Netflix
Re:
On the post: MPAA Tries To Ignore The Fact That The Study It Paid For Reveals Very Few Top Films Are Available On Netflix
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Major Labels Easily Win Lawsuit Against Grooveshark
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Major Labels Easily Win Lawsuit Against Grooveshark
Re:
On the post: Cops Seize Car When Told To Get A Warrant, Tell Owner That's What He Gets For 'Exercising His Rights'
Re: The cop could smell it?
On the post: Cops Seize Car When Told To Get A Warrant, Tell Owner That's What He Gets For 'Exercising His Rights'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: General corruption?
Next >>