[ExI] No to Google

[John Klos]

It's unfortunate that you think that billionaires need more of your money 
and that you're emphatically for the idea of conceding total control and 
autonomy to corporations.

>        > Google is simply too big and powerful, 
> 
> The world is big and powerful so it's inevitable that there are going to 
> be big and powerful things in it. If not corporations then what do you 
> want those big and powerful things to be, lots of high technology 
> corporations or one huge nation state? As for me, I'm an unrepentant 
> capitalist.

We don't need to choose one of the "big and powerful" things. We can exist 
outside of that, at least in the context of this discussion.

>       > and seems to be getting moreso all the time. 
> 
> Yes, that's because the world is getting larger and more powerful, and 
> that growth rate is about to go into hyperdrive.

This has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

>       > I'm fairly sure that I'm the only person I know in real life
>       >that doesn't have one [a Google account]
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised.  

That was a joke. Agreeing with it doesn't feel like one. Many, many people 
don't have Google accounts.

>       > Contrast this with the browsers that we use, or the operating
>       >system/s we favour.
> 
> I assume you have a phone, if so its operating system almost certainly 
> came from Apple or Google, and your web browser probably came from 
> Apple, Google or Microsoft, mine sure does and I thank them for it.

It's fine that you're happy to simply do what everyone else does, but if 
that's the case, why discuss transhumanism? If it's not coming straight 
from Google or being sold by Amazon, what interests you about it? Why 
would you step outside your comfort zone for some things, and at the same 
time advocate for pledging fealty otherwise?

>       > When I said "I'd hate to lose this list", I wasn't referring to
>       > Google shutting the list down, I was referring to the fact that
>       > if it moved to Google, I wouldn't be able to take part in it any
>       > more. The same reason I sometimes read, but never post to, the
>       > Extropolis list.
> 
> I'm sincerely sorry to hear that, I'd really like to get your input. But 
> what negative consequences do you envision happening if you were to make 
> such a post?

I think your picture of the world is too simplistic. Does everyone have a 
Windows computer with Chrome? If they have an older computer, can it be 
upgraded enough to run a modern enough Chrome to continue to use Google?

People can join Google Groups mailing lists without having a Google 
account, but Google doesn't do a good job of telling people that. If you 
visit a Google Groups page and try to do anything aside from look at 
content, you're immediately prompted to log in.

There's a huge difference between something being possible and something 
being straightforward for the average person, and Google here makes this 
possible but decidedly NOT straightforward for the average person.

Add that Google is now trying to force people to "prove" their age by 
uploading government ID, add that Google already makes it exceedingly 
difficult to sign up for an account without providing personal 
information, and add that it's incredibly difficult to sign up without 
using a cell phone number, and we can see why this excludes countless 
people who don't have fancy, newer machines, people who care about 
privacy, and/or people who simply don't like or want to use or can't use 
cell numbers.

So I think you're assuming that the concern is "negative consequences" 
that're "envision(ed) happening", when it could be any of a number of 
other reasons.

John