does google make us stupid?

[heavenlyboy34]

I heard an interesting story/interview on the radio today. The interviewee apparently did an experiment-trying to avoid using google for an extended period of time. She claims that she suffered symptoms similar to withdrawl, and had difficulty functioning without the big G.

Is this dependence on technology making Americans stupid slaves? :confused: It sure seems like it! Discuss it if this topic interests you. :)

[FrankRep]

I heard an interesting story/interview on the radio today. The interviewee apparently did an experiment-trying to avoid using google for an extended period of time. She claims that she suffered symptoms similar to withdrawl, and had difficulty functioning without the big G.

Is this dependence on technology making Americans stupid slaves? :confused: It sure seems like it! Discuss it if this topic interests you. :)

One sec, let me Google the answer.

[Kludge]

Google is an extension of my brain, as is Wikipedia. Unfortunately, the read rates are lower, but that's the sacrifice you make with reliable memory that is nearly limitless.


How could anyone function with.... 99.92% of their brain missing?!

[Omphfullas Zamboni]

One sec, let me Google the answer.

http://www.google.com/search?q=+can+Google+make+us+stupid&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

[Kludge]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljbI-363A2Q

[heavenlyboy34]

Google is an extension of my brain, as is Wikipedia. Unfortunately, the read rates are lower, but that's the sacrifice you make with reliable memory that is nearly limitless.


How could anyone function with.... 99.92% of their brain missing?!

it sounds weird, but it's (practically) been done! There's a procedure called a 'hemispherectomy' in which one hemisphere of a person's brain is surgically removed. (generally due to uncontrollable, constant seizures) People who go through this tend to do well, and the other hemisphere mostly compensates-odd as it sounds. :eek: (I saw this on some Learning Channel show once)

[slothman]

Oddly enough I just used Goggle to look something up.
I didn't know the defination of a word.
Without search engines I might have had to remember it.

[Wendi]

I disagree. I think Google gives us an almost limitless ability to continue learning new information all the time. Whereas once we were limited to the books available to us locally, or experiences of those around us, now we can research any subject at any time and get knowledge from all over the world.

[SnappleLlama]

derrrr....whut? Huh?

[ShowMeLiberty]

http://www.google-watch.org/

It's easy not to use Google. I stopped using it years ago. I use Dogpile (www.dogpile.com) instead. And I get better search results.

[acptulsa]

I searched for anti-federalist papers and thought, no, this doesn't make me stupid. Then I entered 'Japanese tv game shows'. i r da smarter gie dan efer 4 it, 2. tank god 4 da net. ignance were nefer as bliss as dis.

[jkr]

i dont count on it being "around" forever.

[micahnelson]

In the early days, man hunted with his bare hands. Soon, We invented spears.

"Spear Make Man Weak" Said an older tribesmen, showing his strong hands to the others as they sat around a fire.

There was silence, until the older tribesmen was speared, and then set on fire.

Tools, kids. Its why we aren't still outside naked in the rain running from saber tooth tigers.

[Wendi]

http://www.google-watch.org/

It's easy not to use Google. I stopped using it years ago. I use Dogpile (www.dogpile.com (http://www.dogpile.com)) instead. And I get better search results.

I clicked on your link out of curiousity, and the first article I read had this in it...

Microsoft, Yahoo, and AOL did the right thing by complying with the subpoena,

They just lost a lot of credibility in my book :confused:

[Misesean]

http://www.google-watch.org/



That site is disgusting.

[Kludge]

That site is disgusting.

I thought it was amusing....


http://www.google-watch.org/gifs/adman2.gif (http://www.google-watch.org/)

[constituent]

no (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5X7HKxpiQA)

[mediahasyou]

Think of google as a highspeed dictionary. And reading the dictionary does not make you stupid.

[Misesean]

I thought it was amusing....



The articles I read were bashing Google for "copyright" issues because they want to put books online, for advertizing because "the more a company pays, the more often will the ad be visible" (gee, just like any other advertizing medium, then?!) and attacking Mozilla for not paying huge amounts of tax that the Google-Watch people thinks they should, etc.
Statists through and through. Who's more dangerous, Google or these idiots?

[ShowMeLiberty]

The articles I read were bashing Google for "copyright" issues because they want to put books online, for advertizing because "the more a company pays, the more often will the ad be visible" (gee, just like any other advertizing medium, then?!) and attacking Mozilla for not paying huge amounts of tax that the Google-Watch people thinks they should, etc.
Statists through and through. Who's more dangerous, Google or these idiots?

You read one article and determined that the site is statist? I suggest you look a bit deeper. Just because the author of the copyright article might be off base doesn't invalidate the entire case against Google.

From the article "Google As Big Brother (http://www.google-watch.org/bigbro.html)":

1. Google's immortal cookie:
Google was the first search engine to use a cookie that expires in 2038. This was at a time when federal websites were prohibited from using persistent cookies altogether. Now it's years later, and immortal cookies are commonplace among search engines; Google set the standard because no one bothered to challenge them. This cookie places a unique ID number on your hard disk. Anytime you land on a Google page, you get a Google cookie if you don't already have one. If you have one, they read and record your unique ID number.

2. Google records everything they can:
For all searches they record the cookie ID, your Internet IP address, the time and date, your search terms, and your browser configuration. Increasingly, Google is customizing results based on your IP number. This is referred to in the industry as "IP delivery based on geolocation."

3. Google retains all data indefinitely:
Google has no data retention policies. There is evidence that they are able to easily access all the user information they collect and save.

4. Google won't say why they need this data:
Inquiries to Google about their privacy policies are ignored. When the New York Times (2002-11-28) asked Sergey Brin about whether Google ever gets subpoenaed for this information, he had no comment.

5. Google hires spooks:
Matt Cutts, a key Google engineer, used to work for the National Security Agency. Google wants to hire more people with security clearances, so that they can peddle their corporate assets to the spooks in Washington.

6. Google's toolbar is spyware:
With the advanced features enabled, Google's free toolbar for Explorer phones home with every page you surf, and yes, it reads your cookie too. Their privacy policy confesses this, but that's only because Alexa lost a class-action lawsuit when their toolbar did the same thing, and their privacy policy failed to explain this. Worse yet, Google's toolbar updates to new versions quietly, and without asking. This means that if you have the toolbar installed, Google essentially has complete access to your hard disk every time you connect to Google (which is many times a day). Most software vendors, and even Microsoft, ask if you'd like an updated version. But not Google. Any software that updates automatically presents a massive security risk.

7. Google's cache copy is illegal:
Judging from Ninth Circuit precedent on the application of U.S. copyright laws to the Internet, Google's cache copy appears to be illegal. The only way a webmaster can avoid having his site cached on Google is to put a "noarchive" meta in the header of every page on his site. Surfers like the cache, but webmasters don't. Many webmasters have deleted questionable material from their sites, only to discover later that the problem pages live merrily on in Google's cache. The cache copy should be "opt-in" for webmasters, not "opt-out."

8. Google is not your friend:
By now Google enjoys a 75 percent monopoly for all external referrals to most websites. Webmasters cannot avoid seeking Google's approval these days, assuming they want to increase traffic to their site. If they try to take advantage of some of the known weaknesses in Google's semi-secret algorithms, they may find themselves penalized by Google, and their traffic disappears. There are no detailed, published standards issued by Google, and there is no appeal process for penalized sites. Google is completely unaccountable. Most of the time Google doesn't even answer email from webmasters.

9. Google is a privacy time bomb:
With 200 million searches per day, most from outside the U.S., Google amounts to a privacy disaster waiting to happen. Those newly-commissioned data-mining bureaucrats in Washington can only dream about the sort of slick efficiency that Google has already achieved.



That doesn't sound statist to me. Just beware of Google is all I'm saying. At least be aware that every time you use Google you are sharing a lot of information about yourself with a lot of people/organizations that aren't necessarily trustworthy.

[Josh_LA]

absolutely, technology makes us lazy and dependent.

[newyearsrevolution08]

I think it is "spell check" that is making us idiots. No need to know how to write correctly because our computer will tell us when our words don't make any sense. Great when you are drunk though.

[Misesean]

You read one article and determined that the site is statist?

No; I read five or six - the nonsense I quoted above didn't all come from one article (I thought that was obvious!)

None of the things you mention ought to present the slightest problem from a libertarian viewpoint. Google is no different than any other web site (and if you don't want their cookies, don't accept them; etc.); but this site not "web-watch" (oh, the internet is evil!), it's specifically "google-watch"