Google reads everything. So thoroughly, that it knows exactly that you are looking for a product that is for sale in multiple stores. Before you end up in one of those stores, you get stuck with Google, and you are helped with the comparison. Google's own price comparison tool. Not entirely independent of course. And not unbiased either. The 'independent' guide that prefers a certain number of stores, because a nice tip is in prospect. The EU is now angry and is imposing a fine of 2.4 billion euros on Google . That's a lot of money.
Google doesn't say anything
Google reads everything. Including all the computers of the Russian FIFA members who indicated via their gmail accounts that they were not insensitive to attentions in exchange for their vote for Qatar. Prove it, say the Russians, because unfortunately, all the computers we used at that time were leased and we had to hand them in. Yes, but, we think, it is known that many messages went via Google, so more must be known there. In fact, Google knows exactly what happened, but Google does not say anything.
Google reads everything. There is nothing wrong with this dry observation. The big question is what you do with the knowledge. How smart is the software that is responsible for interpreting the content of the message? How far do the achievements of artificial intelligence go, which has to make the step from reading to interpreting to understanding?
It is a general philosophical question. Acquiring and then having knowledge is one thing. The question of how you act on the knowledge is another. That applies to Google, it applies to Tjeenk Willink, it applies to the public prosecutor who has crown witnesses pay for a statement, it applies to the pope who knows more or less about the actions and conduct of his Australian cardinal George Pell.
Ethics
And so you arrive at ethics, one of the hong kong email list components of epistemology. How does someone who knows a great deal deal with his knowledge? In this story: how ethical is Google? How should you interpret ' don't be evil '? Can the owner of knowledge set his own ethical standards, or should he leave that to someone else, a kind of Senate?
The EU's fine claim will probably result in a settlement. Can ethics be settled?
Once again it becomes clear that the more we reach each other via digital networks, the greater the need for ethical and philosophical discipline becomes, which must have a major influence on the way we deal with the enormous mountain of knowledge that is being built up.
It is well known that Generation Z and social media go hand in hand. The use of these platforms by young people (born between 1995 and 2010) is self-evident. Searching for information, maintaining contacts and sending messages. 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, they spend as much of their time as possible on various channels. But which platforms are the most popular among Generation.