Google *is* a corporation.

I’m not going to use Google for search, Gmail for mail or Chrome for browsing. Nor do I suggest anyone else should. But the aforementioned “pay-for” Internet proposal should mark the death of our naievete when it comes to Google.

Dodge vs Ford: Corporate responsibility is to the wealth of the shareholders, not the community.

I know that many people saw Google’s launch stock value as a landmark for things like open source software and internet freedom. Others thought it was a last gasp of the .com bubble.

It was neither. Google didn’t have gold that we could point at. It had something more valuable but purposely less tangible to those contributing to it; like a spittoon in a gold-miner’s bar.

What’s better than gold or oil or a tangible product? A map to everyone’s gold and oil, and precise details of how to encourage them to part with it…

I suspect that a vague general sense of “too good to be true” with everything that Google is offering and branching into may have been a part of the failure of Google Wave to succeed.

Most of Google’s employees are there for the reasons that made us all so fond of Google. And for now, that’s reason enough to keep me from seeing Google as Microsoft21k.

2 Comments

I googled it, scroogled it, binged in, and ixquicked it but none of them could tell me: is it fixed yet?

Leave a Reply

Name and email address are required. Your email address will not be published.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title="" rel=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <pre> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> 

%d bloggers like this: