About time for a nothing for free law

If no bill is send, no tax can be claimed. And free services never are really free. This are the two reasons why free internet services should be forbidden.
If one would be obliged to pay for a search engine, let say a minimum of the cost plus 10%, one probably would see a range of specialised search engines emerge beside Google.
Facebook would have all kind of local competitors, and so on.

Local governments would get an honest share of the pie. Privacy would no longer be an issue, because one doesn't need to pay with privacy for a service that claims to be free.

Why governments don't stop the illusion of free services, and really do something about privacy and forbid free services?

Comments

Brussels could do a better job

Abstract Legal systems should enable good public services, not just complicate things. We (the people) don't really need governments, we need good public services. These days, too little is done to ensure a level playing field for companies on a global scale. Enabling big companies to lock buyers into their influence sphere and squeeze as much as possible money out of them. Below three examples where our public services fail. Selling hardware with preinstalled OS should be illegal If a consumer buys a smartphone or a personal computer, it is always sold with an operating system preinstalled. This fixes the consumer into the commercial influence sphere of the hardware seller. Apparently, the Brussels bureaucracy is not really interested in a plane playing field that enables European suppliers to participate in the smartphone and desktop computing market. Would Brussels really be interested in a plane playing field, it would not be allowed to sell end-user devices (smartphones and pe...

The end of Windows is underway

Thanks to the virtual machine (VM) revolution, slowly but surely UX (unix like) operating systems are becoming the defacto industry standard. All Apple OS-es are UX based. Android is UX based. All internet is UX based. The whole Linux family of OS-es are UX based. The only remaining exception is Windows. The virtual machine revolution and cloud based (UX) computing is nail in the coffin for Windows however. Now Google acquired Cameyo and with that brings Windows apps to ChromeOS. It is only a matter of time and all the functionality only available on Windows will be available as a SaaS or ( first in VM mode) on Linux. All companies (for example SolidWorks ) start to offer SaaS, forced by the market. They feel the pressure of OnShape . Most development work is already done on Linux based machines. Windows is also becoming legacy because there is extra cost involved to make apps for Windows compatible with the newest generation of hardware (linke Tablets). This is...

Better laptop keyboard by Google than by Apple.

Apple was on the forefront of human interfacing. Not only technical but also emotional. The better feel of Apple products! In one area, however, they missed the boat. The keyboard! Google with their Chromebooks are catching up on the feel and user experience. Their keyboard experience is even better than the MacBook experience. Just take a look at the keys left of the space bar on a MacBook and the ChromeBook. MacBook ChromeBook Apple needs 4 keys! Google only 2! Industry standard knows the Control and Alt key. But Apple has the strange legacy from the early days of Apple computing called the Command key. Apple wake up! Linux has become the industry standard (not knowing the Command key concept). Much more user would switch from Windows to macOS if they were not hindered by the stupid Apple keyboard legacy. Google makes the switch experience smooth. Apple makes it hard. Guess who will win?

Clocked (en)

Search This Blog