Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
For some reason, this morning I wound up reading this article about Google, published six years ago in the London Review of Books. John Lanchester concludes--and remember, this was in 2006:
Putting all this together, we reach the conclusion that, on the one hand, Google is cool. On the other hand, Google has the potential to destroy the publishing industry, the newspaper business, high street retailing and our privacy.
And, why, goodness--that's just what it did! If I'd really grasped this, I probably would have spent the past six years differently.
The best historical analogy for where Google is today probably comes from the time when the railroads were being built. Everyone knew that trains and railways would change the world, but no one predicted the invention of suburbs. Google, and the increased flow of information on which it rides and from which it benefits, is the railway. I don’t think we’ve yet seen the first suburbs.
I think we're beginning to see the suburbs--and they look horrible to me.
While many conservatives are wondering whether the sexual revolution was overall bad for women, I'm much more concerned that Google--and the Internet, generally--have destroyed the publishing industry, the newspaper business, high street retailing and our privacy, with consequences that have certainly been more deleterious to my happiness than the sexual revolution.
I have an ominous feeling about what the death of publishing and newspapers really means, a feeling that may not entirely be connected to the catastrophe it represents for me, personally, although it's hard to say.
As for the death of privacy, I'm dead certain we'll all live to regret that.
What do you think--was the Internet a big mistake?
***
Update: Thanks, E.J.! We love you!
- Comment (86)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (5)
Comments:
May '11
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
Must be an April Fool's post because I don't know why anyone would call the evolution of publishing to a new and more open system not relying on publishers a bad thing.
Feb '11
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
"Google--and the Internet, generally--have destroyed the publishing industry, the newspaper business, high street retailing and our privacy"
Would it be a *good thing* if information flow were still controlled by biased media gatekeepers? At present, certainly, there would be no hope at all of displacing Barack Obama as President.
Is it really even possible for an advanced society to survive and thrive when its when its feedback system is entirely in the hands of people whose "expertise" consists of their journalism degrees and/or their tv-suitable hair?
One of the best things about the Internet is that one can actually read things by people who know what they are talking about at more than a very superficial level.
Apr '11
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
As with everything else,as things change some old comfortable situations get left behind...I for one cannot imagine being without the internet and the freedom it provides,the access it allows and the competition for goods and services it encourages!I do think it is ironic that this complaint about the internet is put forward on the internet by an interesting woman who spends her days blogging on the internet!
Nov '11
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
Rather than attempt to respond to Claire's provocative post, I am going to pretend that she is a Luddite, and go back to watching the Matrix while I drink absinthe.
Aug '10
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
Paul, see Crow's Nest's point about the suspicion engendered by the desire for privacy. Nothing arouses the suspicion of a jealous state faster than the use of encryption software. It's like coming home reeking of cheap perfume.
That is a problem with the state, not with encryption technology, or the nature of secrecy itself for that matter.
Google, on the other hand, finds nothing "suspicious" about its users' desire to keep their privacy. It does disable certain features if you choose to extend any effort towards maintaining your privacy.
Just for fun, I switched to my Tor enabled browser to write this post. I also accessed Ricochet through a UK based proxy and used hidemy[CoC breaking expletive].com to disguise my destination from my own browser. My browser history and login cookie will be automatically deleted once I close the browser window.
If anyone's bothering to watch me, they must think Ricochet is the raciest, most scandalous site out there!
Feb '12
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
The internet is fine, and Google is just a marketing company that uses datamining to deliver ad's. It's not terribly surprising, really. They have to make their Googolplex of money somehow.
The problem is that our population has, by and large, absolutely no idea how that newfangled Intertubes thing works. Everyone uses it, but they haven't a clue what makes it work, and more importantly, how it is invading their privacy more every day. There are stories popping up all the time about how so-and-so company invaded consumers privacy in the hunt for a way to deliver ad's.
It seems to be a byproduct of our consumer society. People need to sell you stuff, and companies that can provide data about your buying habits help them achieve this goal. This is why, as often as I can, I choose to go the pay route for stuff. By paying for stuff like XM Radio, news sites, or shareware programs, I get to avoid the pervasive ad's, pop-ups, and collection of my private data.
We need a better nongovernmental watchdog system to alert us of companies snooping on us. An Internet BBB.
Mar '11
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
Paul Snively: As a software engineer with an interest in economics, I'
I'd say there is a strong demand for it, but little know-how in terms of actually finding it and implementing it. I know about these tools, and use some of them. But others don't know they exist, they don't know the acronyms, they don't have a clue on how to begin using them. Seems like too much work, causes them to panic at the jargon, or else they resent that they need to "lock the doors and windows" in a neighborhood that was once so safe. In fact, until they get robbed or face just how much of their lives is already public, they will refuse to do anything at all.
Dec '10
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
NEWSFLASH 2012 GOOGLE IS FRIGHTENING EVERYONE. OH NO IT'S THE COOKIE MONSTER! AHHHHHH!
Oct '10
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
I don't actually encounter these great unwashed masses who believe the internet provides us the unvarnished truth, and I venture to guess that living in Los Angeles, I would encounter them if they existed in any great numbers. :-)
As for being obtuse, perhaps. But if someone is going to toss the words "information" and "knowledge" around, ipso facto implying that they are, in fact, distinct, I reserve the right to put on my information theory hat and demand definitions and evidence, particularly when the assertion is of the "the world's going to hell in a handbasket" genre. In fact, I'll go so far as to say "assumes facts not in evidence." I found Claire's post disappointing for its effectively reactionary tone; it tends to lend credence to some of the more vile of the "Progressive" *shudder* criticisms of conservatism. To see them amplified without so much as an actual argument is quite disheartening.
Oct '10
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
I love that I can rely on KC to dot some i's and cross some t's for me. :-)
IMHO, this is exactly right. Imperfect though it may be, flawed as it certainly is, adult humans' ability to sift through the information they get and draw their own conclusions is enhanced by the greater distribution (in the distributed systems sense, not the distribution channels sense, although there is some overlap) of information. By contrast, I invite you to recall the era of my childhood, when you could have any information you wanted, as long as it came from NBC, CBS, ABC, your local paper, the paper of the nearest major metropolitan area, or your local library.
Oct '10
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
There is a natural tendency, especially for those already adult when a new technology emerges, to think of it and consequently employ it along the lines of pre-existing technologies. It isn't surprising that among the first applications of packet switched open networks were file transfer (the electronic equivalent of mailing a tape) and electronic mail.
It's more of a generational shift to appreciate the change in the nature of a new technology. I think we're only beginning to appreciate this in the case of the Internet, which I believe is a totally new medium, unprecedented in the human experience. Consider—in the past we have had a variety of one to one media: conversation, letters, and the telephone; and one to many mass media: books, magazines, newspapers, and radio and television broadcasting. But we have never before had a many to many mass medium: where anybody connected has the potential to expose their work to a global audience, constrained only by the merit of the work, the ability to draw attention to it, and luck.
We are only beginning to see the implications of this. The Internet is the baby picture of the noösphere.
Oct '10
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
Claire, forgive me, but: seriously? By that logic, a legal mandate that mail be sent on postcards, rather than in envelopes, would be A-OK because using an envelope would be like coming home reeking of cheap perfume.
But you do raise a key social point, which is that it's easier to not provide something in the first place than it is to take it away later (cf. Prohibition): in America, at least, we assumed we had privacy and didn't demand its protection in many meaningful ways either before or after the rise of the Internet. The creators of the Internet (my people!) were wild-eyed idealists who believed in the good will of everyone who would use the technology to exchange information. Well, what can I say about that but: oops? Like it or not, we're now in the position of having to act suspiciously in order to establish, and protect, our innocence.
Mar '11
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
Paul Snively
To see them amplified without so much as an actual argumentis quite disheartening. · 0 minutes ago
Paul (and others here), I understand your frustration, but as you are pretty tech-savvy you've known for ages the consequences of going online, and the differences between data collection, data analysis, and actual snooping.
But bear in mind that to most folks this is still very very new. I can't tell you how many times I've had conversations with people that began with "Can you believe what [insert popular online servce] is doing?!?!?" followed by 5 minutes of panic.
I respond with "That's been general knowledge for X years, and here's how you deal with it if it bothers you." This applies to cookies, flash cookies, you name it. But, when you tell them to use a browser plugin here, a DNS change there, they panic the same way. I say use Noscript, then they complain that "the web is broken". I say use BetterPrivacy, then their flash game settings and scores aren't saved.
(continued below)
Mar '11
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
Paul: As to your first point, we have different estimations of the way that people often treat what they find on the internet. I don't think there are large unwashed masses who think they are getting God's own Truth from their Google search, but I do think that more often then not they treat what they find online as reasonably authoritative regardless of whether it deserves to be treated that way or not. That is, authoritative enough that they often don't dig much deeper then the first couple of hits, and make decisions and form opinions based on that data.
There are goldmines of useful information and even, as I said in a previous post, very elevated sites online that deal in depth with many many subjects in such a way that they contribute to (in that heinously contemporary jargon) "knowledge formation".
But I think that in the midst of these sites, there is also more noise to sort through than ever before, and a set of practices in social networks and elsewhere online that contribute to certain habits which reduce the faculties necessary for true learning (including attention span).
Oct '10
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
All of this is really excellent evidence that the demand isn't very high. Sorry, but there it is. Every other mass-consumer-oriented software category has had to address usability and transparency requirements from its user base. Why is privacy-enhancing software somehow different? The armchair economist in me isn't buying. :-)
The resentment issue, IMHO, gets closer to the social/psychological crux. People's response to the growth of the internet really does seem to parallel a small town boy moving to the city. What do you mean, I can't trust the neighbors anymore? I admit I don't know how to address that.
Mar '11
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
(continued)
There is something else at work here in our fears: Our own egos. We're terrified that if they are collecting data on us, then it must be because of some nefarious design to get us.
As I have reminded my more conspiracy-minded friends and relations, why should they think themselves so significant as to be a deliberate target of them?
But data gathering can go both ways. If Google can watch you, rest assured others can watch them.
As for me, I'm so paranoid I've disabled even my spell-chek. Can't stand the thought of it watching my everee keystroke and ficksing things behind my bak.
Mar '11
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
Paul Snively
All of this is really excellent evidence that the demand isn't very high. Sorry, but there it is. Every other mass-consumer-oriented software category has had to address usability and transparency requirements from its user base. Why is privacy-enhancing software somehow different? The armchair economist in me isn't buying. :-)
Well to refine my point, demand would be higher if the price (i.e. the costs of implementation) were lower. See my point about flash cookies above.
Jan '11
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
Paul Snively
Imperfect though it may be, flawed as it certainly is, adult humans' ability to sift through the information they get and draw their own conclusions isenhancedby the greater distribution (in the distributed systems sense, not the distribution channels sense, although there is some overlap) of information.
Agreed. Maybe our analysis skills aren't perfect ... but I have hope that we'll all get better!
I do know one thing; we couldn't get better under the old system. At least we have a chance now.
Mar '11
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
eh? what was that? Something about spans? I'm lost
:')
Oct '10
Re: Is There Any Way to Shove Google Back in the Tube?
Crow, thanks for your patient responses! I do think this is the key point, but even if it is, what do you think it results in, apart from maybe a local minimum in quality of decision making until enough new information, from whatever source(s), impinges itself upon the consciousness of the decisionmaker, to escape that local minimum? More to the point, why do you seem to believe that this process of local minima of quality of decision making is something new, introduced by the rise of the internet? Or am I misunderstanding your point?