{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
3/14/2013 9:33:20 PM
2
[quote]So much for "don't be evil", eh?[/quote]
Really Google is effectively neutral.
They do good things but then they go and do stupid things.
Then again by that same token, if you were faced with a person who was directly responsible for cutting your paycheck each week, would you just let it happen? Encourage him? No.
Much as we hate it, ad money funds Google. It funds all the nice things that we like that Google provides. No money, no Google and no nice things. And somebody, we, have to pay for it. In this case, pay for it by viewing ads.
Personally, I hate ads and think that Google should find a new revenue source but I'm trying to see both sides of the issue here.
English
-
Edited by RighteousTyrant: 3/15/2013 2:46:10 PM[quote]Personally, I hate ads and think that Google should find a new revenue source but I'm trying to see both sides of the issue here.[/quote]They aren't going to. That's their product, and expecting them to find a new revenue source is like expecting Ford to stop making automobiles and start making, say, furniture. All the data that Google gets on us from searches, it turns into workable intelligence for marketers, who use it to better target their ads to the people most likely to buy the advertised product. Ads are speech, and companies certainly enjoy the same freedom of speech as the rest of us. And how can you expect anyone to sell anything if no one is able to market/advertise their products. The other side of the argument should be easy to grasp.
-
I don't think I could have put it as eloquently but I agree with this.
