Google: Simplifying Excellence

October 22, 2020

Almost everyone knows Google. I spotted an eclectic write up in Entertainment Overdose (an estimable publication). The article “Eric Schmidt, Who Got YouTube for a Premium, Assumes Social Media Networks Are Amplifiers for Idiots” contains a quote. This is an alleged statement attributed to Eric Schmidt, the overseer of Google until 2018.

Here’s the alleged pearl of wisdom:

The context of social networks serving as amplifiers for idiots and crazy people is not what we intended.

But it happened with YouTube, right? Who was running the company at this time? I think it was Mr. Schmidt.

It seems that Mr. Schmidt’s social world view is divided into those who are not crazy (possibly Google employees and those who share some Google mental characteristics but are in some way in touch with reality) and those who are crazy. Crazy means mentally deranged, which may be a bad thing. Plus, the “crazy” group uses social media as “amplifiers.” This seems to suggest that anyone using social media falls into the crazy category. Is this correct?

Note the “we”. The royal “we” appears to embrace the senior management of Google.

Now check out the Rupert Murdoch “real” news Wall Street Journal for October 22, 2020. The story to which I direct your attention is called “Google Ex-CEO Hits DOJ As Antitrust Battle Looms.” [When the story is posted to wsj.com, you will have an opportunity to purchase access. Until then, hunt for the dead tree edition and look on Page A-1.]

The write up reports that Mr. Schmidt said:

There’s a difference between dominance and excellence.

Is the idea may be that operating like a plain vanilla monopoly not acceptable. This suggests that monopoly delivering “excellence” is a positive for everyone.

Is YouTube dominant or excellent? Are those who post links to children’s playgrounds to the delight of individuals with proscribed tendencies idiots? (There are other, more suitable terms I believe.)

And that may bring up other questions; for example:

What about YouTube? That’s a social media type service which generates billions in ad revenue. What percentage of the YouTube content is for Googley types? What percentage for the crazies? Why is crazy content allowed on YouTube? Why does YouTube allow videos which show users how to steal commercial software? Run this query: photoshop cs6 crack. Here’s what I saw displayed on October 22, 2020, at 1023 am US Eastern:

image

Net net: Google operates in a medieval “great chain of being” mode. Google is at the apex. Others are lower on the chain. True, Google is interesting and successful. Those who explain the “excellence” of Google are minimizing the social impact of its actions. But if you understand the difference between dominance and excellence, all is right with the world. If you don’t get it, Google has some descriptors: idiot and crazy. There is a difference for sure.

Excellence may not be the correct word.

Stephen E Arnold, October 22, 2020

Comments

Got something to say?





  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta