[usr1106]

The deeper background is of course Google's business model of data and privacy prostitution: Users give their private life to Google and they get web search, email, and videos back.

In a more reasonable world users would pay money for the services they want to use.

Of course it needs to be noted that most users don't even understand that they are selling themselves. And of the few who do most still think it's better than paying money.

This ruling, should Google comply in the end, will not change anything. Google will store the data in the EU and that's it. I don't think they share user data with the advertiser when they show an ad. So they could still show ads of US companies. And that's a niche business only anyway because when Europeans do business with Amazon, Disney, and the like they deal with the respective European subsidiaries already.

[moonchrome]

>In a more reasonable world users would pay money for the services they want to use.

>Of course it needs to be noted that most users don't even understand that they are selling themselves. And of the few who do most still think it's better than paying money.

This is such pretentious snobbery. In a world where you have to pay for search engine I am still dirt poor working some shit entry-level job/doing manual labor because when I was a kid I couldn't even afford interned and had to hitch off a neighbour, having free access to Google, tons of free learning material, messaging boards, etc. is what got me out of that situation.

I pay to avoid advertisement, but that's a luxury I can afford now days, and I have almost no concerns about privacy - I don't care at all that Google knows my interests, browsing history, purchase history, etc.

The concerns about data collection I see are mostly blown way out of proportion and most people rightfully don't care TBH.

[kraf]

This is an extremely naive view of the situation. I'm really glad that you were able to help yourself but the material likely wasn't by Google.

In the meantime Google is using this information to manipulate your desires and actions and you can be sure as hell that it is using data about your behavior and interests to improve it's position in the market. Google buys companies and stocks and they have an advantage few of us can ever hope to have.

I promise you, Google knows you better than you know yourself and it's using that knowledge to further it's own interests without caring much about the people, countries or economies it's hurting.

[simion314]

>I don't care at all that Google knows my interests, browsing history,

I also don't care that Google,NSA, KGB, CIA, ChIna knows my browsing history or what files I have on my PC but I care if this groups know everyone browsing history because they can affect me indirectly by blackmailing, manipulating key individuals or entire populations with targeted ads or propaganda.

Is the same with fake news like "WiFi is illegal in Japan because causes cancer" , this fake shit won't affect me directly but affects people in my family so it affect me indirectly and I have to reduce the damage done.

[cdrx]

> This ruling, should Google comply in the end, will not change anything. Google will store the data in the EU and that's it.

The US CLOUD Act allows US law enforcement to force Google to hand over data; even if that data is stored outside the USA.

It is highly likely that processing and storing analytics data only in the EU is not enough to "fix" Google's issue here, because the USA still has juristiction.

See the recent Akamai / Cookiebot case.

[Aerroon]

>Users give their private life to Google and they get web search, email, and videos back.

>In a more reasonable world users would pay money for the services they want to use.

But would people actually be willing to pay? They rather use adblock and other services to circumvent ads rather than pay for YouTube premium.

[usr1106]

> But would people actually be willing to pay

Of course they wouldn't pay as much as they currently do. But the world would be a better place, if they didn't. In Google's case it's more indirect, but in Facebook's case it's obvious. It's well known that Facebook has a negative impact on the mental health of many. Most of the turnover created created just ruins the planet for no good. People in the Western world lived a reasonable life in let's say 1970. The same level produced with the technology of 2020 would reduce destruction of the planet a lot. We would all work 6 hours a day and in the free time we could could walk an hour to the office and an hour back. Or do something else good for physical and mental health. Without a cloud-based GPS tracker and activity cam of course because normal mortals couldn't afford those. So what? I don't see how surveillance capitalism has improved or will improve the situation in Africa either.

[quitit]

GA has always been a raw deal. Businesses that use it don’t realise they’re effectively giving away their customers to any competitor that pays Google more.