you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 19 points 3 days ago (5 children)

Search should be a public utility at this point.

But then again I don't know how you'd neutrally maintain a search algorithm.

Regardless, depending on a private company for something so fundamental to societal functions seems bad.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago (3 children)

    You want the government running search?! That's an absolute horror show; you see the impossibility of neutrality.

    Here in Florida, "homosexual teen" would lead to sites about conversion camps. We might just score a Democrat in the governor's mansion today, so that would change. And then change again. Imagine the non-stop public fight over what is and is not appropriate to show in a search. AH! (I'm actually having a giggle thinking about such fighting. "Trannie" would lead to results about transmissions one year, a transexual slur the next, banned altogether the next.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    At least there would be a non-stop public fight over it, instead of just having to swallow whatever the corpos which captured the government want to put in their search result.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    I imagine there'd be even more bribery if search was run by a government.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago

    If search was provided by a government run by a functioning country with strong democratic roots - AKA the west excluding the US - political parties messing with search would cause them to lose voters. Bribery only increases that effect in an actually working structure.

  • source
  • parent