Vagrant0

You talk as if Vietnam as a good idea to even begin with rather than a failed attempt by the French to attempt to establish a colony that lost out due to the sweeping influence of communism (which only managed to gain a following because of the turmoil and corruption that followed the forced surrender of Japanese conquests between the end of WWI and the end of WWII and the power vacuum followed... Which we mostly ignored because of our own policies that regarded Europe as Europe's problem and Asia a third world backwater of no consequence). You talk as if the very country you presumably live in wasn't already built upon the death of people who came before. Not to discount the service and sacrifice offered by those who lost their lives to a cause that should never have been... But you talk like the only thing that matters is the American price, or that the American price wasn't just another dozen drops in the bucket over the course of a dozen years. Or that we aren't perfectly fine having an even more people die annually to preventable causes like alcohol, suicide, medical mistakes, American poverty. Nevermind the part where many more deaths among Vietnam veterans occurred because of increased levels of suicide, joblessness, drug abuse which was allowed to occur by both that administration and every one since. Or the part where our current returning service members are facing a very similar situation. You talk like the sort of person who protests at the funerals of our fallen service members as if their death was just a matter of politics that can be quickly reversed by putting a mark in a box. You talk like someone who has never left the country, or actually taken a look at the complex mess that is our foreign relations with not just Asia, but Europe, Central and South America, Africa, the Middle East, and just about everywhere between. But I'm sure that somewhere in your mind you are able to justify to yourself that all these problems will vanish once we close our trade relations with China, and foil the plans of Google. Good for you, you've gotten it all figured out. Congratulations boys, the world is saved, here's your gold star to bring home to mommy and a voucher for a free trip to Disney Land. :psyduck: *edit* But thank you for prompting my outrage which led me to look up some people I went to school with who served. To be reminded of those who have been lost, those who have given this country more than you can imagine, and reconnect with those who are still alive... To protect your right to claim that they were all in on the scam.

And it is at this point I point out that China currently owns a large portion of the monetary debt that Americans have been more than happy to build up over the last 5 decades, buying products made in China as a sole means of keeping the Chinese GDP alive and well long enough for this debt to eventually be forgotten about. For better or worse, we're both in the same boat. We could try to kick them out of the boat by saying that we won't pay back the debt they have already paid us for, but that isn't going to happen. We could try and declare that we aren't going to buy things produced in their country, but given the fact that 3/4 of everything sold in America, including most electronics, are made in China, that isn't going to happen either. On one side, you plunge the US into a war (countless wars have started because of debt afterall, including the first world war) against the most populous nation on the planet, a nation with nuclear capabilities who could quite readily ally with our existing enemies. On the other side you ask Americans to give up the life of abundance and comfort that they've enjoyed for the past 50 years, just before China goes into recession and either brings the rest of the world with it, or opens itself to more dangerous factions getting what remains. We are all in the same lifeboat, that ship has sank. We can either paddle together or reside ourselves to drowning together. I'm sorry, but this is the unfortunate truth of the matter, not that you'll accept it. Regardless what the history books claim, Kissinger's trip to China was for multiple reasons. The first was to open up what was then the prominent Chinese governing power in talks with America and try and create a wedge between China and Soviet relations which at the time were being strained by inaction to Mao's requests in quelling the small local rebellions (mostly local gang leaders trying to claim power and money) which were popping up around the country. The second was to discuss plans regarding a region of China which was close to the then colony of Taiwan which was being seen as nearing the end of the lease period along with some other portion of the country (which I can't be bothered to look up). This region was treated by Mao as an experiment to see how foreign influences would affect the brand of communism that he was trying to develop, and was naturally encountering these influences by means of proximity to Taiwan. This region later became a way for Mao to relocate disruptive elements and create propaganda where his brand of communism could be seen as a glorious alternative to the consumer driven madness while slowly exposing his country to modern advancements (including healthcare which he needed). The plans discussed were related to creating trade agreements with this area to bring in American culture instead of that of nearby Japan and Korea and promote the import of American products and electronics. Kissinger's purpose for this was to help recover the declining American economy as well as try and force some good old Freedom into the country. Beyond that, only those present really know what happened, and it mostly doesn't matter. But of course there are conspiracy theories out there claiming everything from aliens to helping Mao assassinate his wife and vice versa. But you don't strike me as someone familiar with what actually happened during the Great Leap Forward or understanding why those decisions were made in order to bring a country of nearly a billion people from backwards political practices and subsistence farming to become a world superpower in the span of 50 years. Mentioning human rights concerns about China, you also don't strike me as someone who is particularly well versed with the American history of genocide and theft against the native people, or even what kind of conditions are present in American cities today. Don't mistake this as an acceptance of human tragedy on my part... Horrific things still were not only allowed, but endorsed in both cases. But unlike most people, I know full well what sort of price our "Great American Prosperity" had. Regardless, with or without Google, these products would still be made, advertised, and sold. The internet didn't even exist as the consumer marketplace it currently does back in the 80's 90's and early 2000's, but still most everything was made in either China, India, or parts of the Middle East. The truth you're missing here is that consumers already decided with their wallets long before Yahoo was anything other than a colloquialism for sex.

What's the sense in crying over spilled milk exactly? If you're trying to prove that meetings happened between political leaders without public mention of this, especially during the age of Nixon, you don't. This is already assumed by anyone who has enough sense to know that the Government has been holding secrets long before the Government even existed as an official body (Benjamin Franklin wasn't taking regular, repeated trips between France and America just for the sake of mapping the ocean floor and continuing his numerous sexual exploits... He was also meeting with people from a nation that was an enemy of the British Colonies (a matter that would have him executed as a traitor) in order to encourage them to send military advisers and aid to the Revolution). Conspiracy theories are fun and all, but are nothing relevant here. Please, indulge me, draw a clear, direct line between whatever you think happened in the age of Nixon and how this relates to Google in the modern age. Explain to me how several dozen companies offering internet solutions, using their own proprietary code and file formats protected under patent law, using their own questionable methods (See Ask + Malware, See Bing + Forced Windows 10 install) to get ahead of their competitors is good for the well being of the Internet. Sell me on the premise of a Windows phone being a good idea by any measure of the word... Just try.

Before the American Civil War, the nation's industry was built upon legalized slavery. During the Industrial Revolution it was built upon companies who owned everything in town, including the debt of their employees as a variation of legalized slavery. After Unions came about, this was moved to illegal slavery by means of working with criminal organizations or hiring illegal immigrants. With trade agreements with Mexico, it eventually just moved south. The Great America you put on a pedestal is, and always has been a lie. The death of American industry has been happening since the 1900's, when educational institutions in the US started regarding manufacturing jobs as "dirty work to be done by the uneducated and minorities". The very notion of a job as a machine operator, or working in industry is one which was used as a threat, pointing to harsh working conditions, unsafe environments, and long hours. While I'm sure you would like to point out our dealings with China, we were doing similar dealings with Mexico and South America long before that. White, well educated people did not WANT to work these jobs, these kinds of jobs were beneath them. Companies meanwhile realized they could not pay the wages demanded by White, well educated workers, and instead hired those who were not. In numerous cases, this amounted to hiring illegal immigrants from Europe and Latin America who could be paid a slave wage without benefits and intimidated into silence about any and all health risks. All this, well before Nixon took office. Consumer culture, much which started in the 1950's, would not have been possible without an abundant and easily exploitable workforce to make cheap abundant products. The only thing that changed since then was that there were developing countries with their own workforce who could be exploited further, for less money, and located far enough away that nobody gives a damn about how many people are being killed, becoming sick from waste, or are being mistreated... Much like the Oil companies and their current operations in Africa. But you didn't see that link I tossed in, and probably fill up your tank without the slightest care about where the oil came from. This is essentially the America that exists, the America that always has existed; if it doesn't stop you from buying what you want, eating what you want, or costing more than you care to spend, most people don't care about what was involved with making those things available. There's no "financial future" left to sell out, it was already gone before anyone here was even a sparkle in their parents eye. The only thing left is a global future... But naturally politicians running in a country where the notion of patriotism has reached unfathomable levels of idiocy would not even attempt to explain this (not that they even had the capacity to, nor the common person the capacity to understand). But hey, keep with whatever notions fit comfortably in your mind, stick with the flock, pay no attention to those ramps at the end of the stockyard, and feel free to choose between ramp A or ramp B as if they didn't lead to exactly the same place. But I digress. Since you admit that Google is not responsible for this particular situation, there is no reason to continue this line of discussion.

I'm sorry... Small local manufacturers were not part of the billion dollar bail-out that was approved by Congress to 'save' the auto industry. Small local manufacturers had to decide between outsourcing in whole or in part in order to keep the company afloat and keep as many of their few dozen employees with a job instead of going under or the company being bought out by someone else who would liquidate assets and close down their facilities anyway. Idealism doesn't work in business, American manufacturing is something that has been getting sold and outsourced long before Google even existed. This happened log ago (1970's-1990's) with the signing of trade agreements which allowed jobs to be shipped to Mexico where labor was cheaper. When China's borders were opened to international trade and transportation became more viable those same jobs moved to China... Where the vast majority of things are now manufactured... Including the components found in any computer made or purchased in the last decade. But I'm sure Google was behind that too? Right? It's clear you don't understand that or anything else I have described here, and have no intention of doing so.

I stand corrected. But this isn't too surprising since we're talking about a small company who has had to outsource some aspects of production to China. Aside from a claim from the Sears website however, there isn't much evidence that supports the statement that this particular item is manufactured in China (incase you do not understand the term "bonding of metals" in regards to the manufacturing process of metal cups with a welded handle). Quality and durability of product doesn't mean anything, even things made in America can use cheap materials or shoddy techniques. As I am not located near where this item is allegedly manufactured, I cannot confirm that they are produced there, or as it turns out, prove that what I can confirm is adequate to address your concerns. So here's a third manufacturer. http://www.williams-sonoma.com/customer-service/about-us.html?cm_type=fnav https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Williams-Sonoma Oh wait, they get some of their goods from other countries where the labor is cheaper too. https://www.quora.com/Who-is-the-manufacturer-or-distributor-for-William-Sonoma-Where-are-they-based-Do-they-make-their-own-designs-or-choose-from-a-selection-of-products Looks like the sad truth of the matter is that it just isn't practical for American companies to pay someone to stand infront of a stamping and welding machine for $12-15 an hour when they can get a similar product from China for less cost. Sorry. Idealism just doesn't work for the majority of successful businesses. and those who did not switch to outsourced manufacturing failed or was bought out and outsourced anyway. I found a French company who manufactures most their products in Europe... but that's not 'merica. I could look back at American Metalcraft inc, ask them specifically if they produce anything in China, go and visit their plant to get a tour... But how do I know if they're telling the truth either, afterall they could have other plants, they could buy portions of their materials from Canada, who could buy portions of those materials from China... Or make them on manufacturing equipment produced in China. But I'm sure Google had its hands in the process of encouraging people to buy lower priced goods when more expensive alternatives were available... right? Oh wait... I can see it now, Google is secretly owned by China... It explains everything from how Chinese manufactured products exist in their searches to their OBVIOUS manipulation of information. :rolleyes: Search engines, incase you bothered to actually learn anything in all this are based around human behavior. Every time you click a link within a set of search terms you signal to the search engine that this link being clicked is a more relevant or more favorable result for what the search engine provided you with. Multiply that by millions of queries a day, and you quickly have a system that is based on an aggregate of user interactions to intentionally pick one option instead of others. No surprise here, people click the links that bring them to shopping sites, sites where they can find a product cheaper, and similar... No surprise here, but when it comes to something relatively inconsequential like a set of measuring cups, (most) people don't care where it was manufactured. Even in terms of professional chefs... They usually work through their own distributors and companies who charge significantly more money than the average consumer will pay. I could spend the next 4-6 hours researching these distributors to find one that offers a set of, specifically; stainless steel measuring cups produced in whole in the US by a company who does not outsource manufacturing, but I think we might agree that would be effort that is not worthwhile. Not only is a measuring cup a non-critical piece of equipment, but I'm sure you would then just accuse me of being a paid schill for that company too or fabricating the evidence myself. A fair accusation to be honest, since an expert web developer could quite capably produce a fake site in less time than that... But entirely beside the point. I can think of a large number of other things which are no longer manufactured in the USA for one reason or another (surprise, the companies who pay to advertise or work with sales and distribution websites had a commercial advantage over those companies who did not) (surprise, the companies who outsourced jobs or materials to cut costs are the ones who have lived through the last 20 years of recession)... None of them proving the least bit of anything about the topic at hand.

https://www.google.com/#q=%22stainless+steel+measuring+cups%22+%2B+%22Made+in+usa%22 7th result down links to a reddit page that links to https://www.amazon.com/All-Clad-Stainless-Measuring-Cookware-5-Piece/dp/B0001ACKWU Manufactured by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-Clad If that's not good enough for you... Because you erroniously believe that Amazon is owned by Google... The first image in the search links to http://www.centralrestaurant.com/American-Metalcraft-MCW4-Measuring-Cup-Set-Wire-Handle-Set-Of-Four-1-4-Cup-1-3-Cup-1-2-Cup-1-Cup-c92p107760.html?st-t=google_shopping&gclid=CMGJm4CCx84CFQ-RaQodDpcItg Manufactured by American Metalcraft... An american company who sells directly from their site. http://www.amnow.com/ Second image is http://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/7078900/?catalogId=13&sku=7078900&cm_ven=Google_PLA&cm_cat=Shopping&cm_pla=default&cm_ite=default&kwid=productads-adid^57526520023-device^c-plaid^73392564639-sku^7078900-adType^PLA&gclid=CIbf0pSDx84CFQaJaQodjcQBzA made by All-Clad mentioned above. None of the sites linked are owned, operated by, or have any meaningful connection with Google beyond maybe advertising space by means of a third party advertising agency who has paid Google to advertise the products offered by their clients. And just because you don't seem to understand how a search engine works... http://computer.howstuffworks.com/internet/basics/search-engine.htm *cough* This is getting rediculous and your psychosis is showing. As for why I'm bothering to spend the effort? Because it is an area of research I probably couldn't have been bothered looking at otherwise. I started out with a similar belief that you did... that Google had a number of shady practices, as evidenced by my initial posts. I wasn't trying to prove you wrong, but rather to prove my own pre-conceptions wrong. Because these beliefs like "nothing is made in the USA any more" are ones which are easy to believe when you walk into the local Walmart and see everything made in China. Because it is easy to maintain beliefs of information being kept from you when you only bothered to look that one time. And because, as a person of integrity, I want to be sure that the claims I am making are reasonably valid beyond the scope of my own head. But, of course, you'll just dismiss this whole thing as me just being part of the conspiracy... If only... I hear Google pays pretty well and I havn't seen a single cent.

They may be justified, in fairness I have not cared to read through all the legalese described in this, but given the state of the world as it currently exists... It won't actually work the way you think it will. The US government itself is far too interested in monitoring internet traffic for its own purposes. There's no reason for the FCC to dictate policies towards encryption when the government is actively shutting down anyone who offers encrypted services. As far as private data goes, that ship sailed LONG, long ago. Anyone who has any idea about the current state of the internet is well aware of this fact, to point that experts have predicted that children born today will not actually have any sense of the concept of privacy by the time they are adults. If a service does not support encoding of passwords or data transmitted (such as most places requiring a password, financial transactions and similar), that information is essentially public domain. This is unfortunately fact, FCC or no. The NSA has higher priority on this issue... which is why it can order your ISP to turn over explicit records of everything you have done online if it has reason to make this request. You may not remember it, but remember that whole deal with Apple refusing to give police backdoor access to iPhones several months ago... The only reason this made any sort of news was because Apple is the only company that operates in the USA who did not immediately cave under the threats of the FBI... And eventually they gave in. More reading on a related matter. More reading. Even more reading. Yet more reading. Still think that you have Privacy online or that the FCC is something to help you in all this? The same situation applies to any other service. As for offering evidence of a third party... You havn't even bothered to look at what evidence I've given you that shows that google is obviously no longer manipulating search results in their own favor. In fact, it would be a fair argument to claim that Google is intentionally manipulating search results so that its own services do not appear high on the list of results. Regardless, you havn't bothered to take notice of any of the search engines I mentioned by name... Some of them operating from their own software and webcrawler bots. You've completely ignored the Chinese web (and companies(despite them actively censoring content, having misleading results and essentially being the actual evil that people claim Google is)) which operates largely without any influence from the West. On every single service that Google operates on, there are competitors both locally and globally, and are services that Google lists within Google search above those services offered by Google. I have provided more than enough evidence here to show that Google is not the only game in town, is not trying to force people to use their services. Any claims to the contrary are simply outdated and disproven within moments of doing your own search in the alleged engine. Their data collection policies are still something I personally disagree with, and there is good reason to be concerned with a US based company recording activities around the world... But much of these activities are still less personal than what your own government is doing or what people are intentionally sharing online (facebook, twitter, instagram, ect). And most of these claims have been addressed over the years... Because they are not a company with practices set in stone (search algorithms changed hundreds of times a year). Competition is only one way to prevent abuse... Modifying practices internally because they prove to be the wrong practices also works. The fact of the matter is that other companies do exist out there, and in most cases they are simply inferior or just horrible companies. Google is not perfect, but in perspective it is a hell of a lot better than some of the alternatives (Microsoft, Apple, Baidu, Yahoo, ect). As to what you have linked as your mountain of evidence against Google, most of these reports you have linked are old news or just completely bogus claims being listed because most people looking at it will just go "wow this is serious" without actually reading further. You might as well have linked me to the pile of pro-Hillary/Trump conspiracy theories, atleast those are an entertaining read with less legalese. For example... from your magic link http://googleopoly.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Googles-Anti-Competitive-Rap-Sheet-May-2014.pdf The top, most recent listing on that page links to http://bit.ly/1kjmTqo which links to http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-14-345_en.htm where no mention of Google is present and the document talks about a patent dispute between Motorola, Samsung, and Apple. Below that... http://wapo.st/1hafIP9 links to https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/apple-google-agree-to-settle-lawsuit-alleging-hiring-salary-conspiracy/2014/04/24/56f1bb32-cbff-11e3-95f7-7ecdde72d2ea_story.html which is a brief article describing the fact that several large tech companies made an agreement to not poach employees from eachother as the practice of this within a microcosm like Silicon Valley is mutually destructive... A matter that is extremely common in business. This is an agreement not just about Google, but rather one that Google made with Apple and a number of smaller companies in the area to agree to not compete for offering salaries... Rather than offering as much money as they wanted and getting the best and the brightest of the workforce. I know you aren't that knowledgeable about business practices... But this sort of agreement is actually very anti-monopoly since those who are part of it aren't trying to siphon the talent out of nearby competitors and force smaller companies into a destructive bidding war for employees. So why is it something they were sued for? Because people want more money and the ability to force their employers to give them a pay increase in order to keep their services. Sometimes there is no perfect solution and it is still better for the company and most of their employees to just settle these claims and carry on. Below that... https://www.scribd.com/doc/215479291/BEUC-s-Google-Complaint which links to a settled complaint where google showed willingness to change the way its search engine works. The particular complaint here is not in relation to anything about Google as a company, but rather how it ranked prices listed from commercial site services suggesting favoritism. It did not even go to court, but Google was more than willing to adjust their search engine to correct for this assumed bias. Going down the list to #49 http://bit.ly/1rKAZG1 which links to http://www.fairsearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Commissioner-of-Competition-v.-Google-Canada-Corp.pdf .While this does indeed link to an actual legal document, the content of this document doesn't actually contain any meaningful information. The only thing it does contain is the formalities related to requesting formation in order to prove a claim (the claim starts at page 24). From page 34... Now I know that you probably aren't familiar with legal proceedings, but cases like this are the sort of thing where just about anyone can make whatever claims they want in order to file for proof of wrongdoing. In this case, the requests made by this company, both within the US court were thrown out. Based on what I can find from the CCB website, they have also decided not to bother with this claim. No court hearing was held, no information was verified. And there is most definitely not anything as silly as "CCB charges Google with ~90% control" of anything. Again, you failed at your homework. In fact that whole block going from 43 to 49 is this same exact document... Made by a small porn company trying to sue Google because google cached thumbnails of their images, among other claims that didn't show enough merit in any of the courts where it was applied. Claims made by a company who apparently has a history of frivolous lawsuits. In regards to marketshare, this is somewhat more accurate. https://www.netmarketshare.com/ Chrome at 21% of market Android Operating system at 66% of market Google web search 72.48% of desktop market, 89.83% of mobile search market (only thing close to 90% here). But this last point is mostly because Yahoo dropped the ball when the net bubble crashed and other companies were using mostly inferior code. These metrics are also looking at things from a global perspective instead of one related to traffic just in the USA, where it has the most native competition. In terms of the Greater Picture , they've lost prominence. 42 links to something creditable https://gigaom.com/2013/12/20/europe-rejects-googles-antitrust-settlement-proposals-yet-again/... But as my images that I linked above show, clearly Google is no longer doing these things. Yay, legal action works. Changes are possible. 24-27 are a similar thing... all the same document. The document in question posted in 2012, discussing a 2010 investigation. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-12-372_en.htm?locale=en describes little in terms of condemning information. Most of the findings listed here are again, things which Google has remedied. Do I really need to go on? This master document you have provided is designed to be intentionally deceptive (self-described rapsheet). The contents of the links, if anything, show that Google is more than willing to correct itself and work with competitors. And, once you start digging through the duplicate entries, the mislabeled entries, ect... What you're left with are things which Google has corrected itself or things which no longer apply to any meaningful degree. As for regulation and laws passed to control Google. I know I'm not going to answer your points to your satisfaction... I doubt such a state can be achieved at this point. But I did address them, which is more than you have done.

I know you didn't even bother to look at this when it was posted by RattleandGrind. But feel free to take another. Actually look this time. The first thing listed is not Google. The second thing listed is not Google. The third thing listed is a wikipedia page listing dozens of search engines. The forth listing is Bing, Google's biggest competition. The 5th listing is a page that says specifically "Say goodbye to Google." I'm not sure we're agreeing on the definition of squelch or control here. Even as far as "manipulated" search results go, I decided to manually type in "Google.com", then type in "Search Engines" and got the same exact results as RattleandGrind, Based on this, and a few other test searches I attempted, I'm tempted to believe that any supposed "bubble" doesn't seem to exist any more. But hey, compare with your own results: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 Notice how the only place that anything related to Google shows up in the top 5 results is in with Android apps, and still it is 4th on that list despite the fact that most android devices use Google software. Still going to claim that Google is trying to shut out competition or control information? I'd even be tempted to guess that the first search... a topic which has been actively suppressed in the USA would have the same results for someone searching from outside the US. The only "manipulated" results I seemed to get was in relation to the sorts of things which are adjusted based on location... Such as listing insurance providers in the state where I am connecting from higher on the list instead of providers from around the world, but rest assured, I only had to go a few pages to find listings from the next state over, and a dozen more pages to get a provider in the UK... So it's not hiding results, but rather adjusting the ranking of them based on what can be logically assumed by my geographical position and somewhat ambiguous search terms. But hey, feel free to post your own comparison images to show how Google is trying to force to use their services or hide things from you. No, you aren't the only person who is claiming this, but you are the one who is present. Just because someone else makes a good case for something, or that parts of Europe have sued over this issue does not necessarily mean that everything about it is correct or describing the whole situation. Naturally, these governments have a personal stake in the matter when it comes to the activities within their countries being monitored and recorded by a company in the USA which has to respond to requests from the FBI and CIA. Naturally, when you have a large portion of the market share people will come up with conspiracy theories, or justify their beliefs about this large entity anyway they can. But this is where a healthy dose of skepticism and actually researching things with an open mind can help you see past the propaganda, tin-hat theories, or unfounded fears. The current CEO of the company gives every impression of someone who understands exactly what is at stake, and who can understand what is best for the longevity of the company he founded instead of what earns him the quickest buck. I hate to break it to you, but as of 2013, EVERY e-mail provider in the US and most of the EU is monitoring the content of your e-mails. Those companies who refused to comply with this law and try to maintain encryption on e-mail services were shut down or seized by the government. One instance of this can be read about in detail here as it was connected with the activities of Snowden. Most ISPs currently are also under similar orders to monitor and record your behavior online. Whatever assumptions you might have had about privacy are already non-existent, and were obliterated under the guise of National Security. The only reason why our physical mail hasn't been met with the same treatment is because it is much harder to search packages without leaving behind evidence that they have been searched. But rest assured they still photograph every piece of mail that passes through their system, and have probably been working on technology to scan the contents of that mail as well. Nevermind the ability of the government to make use of drones to physically track and record your behavior. Sometimes, the people in the tin-foil hats are actually onto something. It would be almost concerning if it wasn't for the fact that none of this recording or monitoring has led to any major crackdowns in human trafficking, the drug trade, terrorism (planned or not), or any of the other things that they've used to justify this monitoring... Not even the false alarms that can occur from bored teenagers typing silly things into a web browser or people who are extreme gun/explosive enthusiasts.

Let me explain. The status quo (the state of things) in your belief (case) is that "Google is a monopoly, that there are no viable alternatives". Correct? Meaning that to defend this case implies providing evidence or argument that supports that statement. Correct? Where have I, or most others done this? Where in my efforts to explain that regulation controls only serve to strengthen monopolies has this statement been reinforced. Where in my descriptions of viable alternatives to Google as a search engine, or mentioning specific alternatives to Youtube have I reinforced this initial statement? The fact that alternatives exist and can be easily found by anyone proves your case incorrect. The fact that this has been repeated to you from others who are not myself, or who are obligated to agree with me, suggests that this is not some unique knowledge to which I am privy (as you assume, from a substantial amount of time researching the matter). If a company is doing something you don't agree with, stop using that company. If you can't be bothered doing it another way, then you have to make a choice between inconvenience or supporting what you disagree with. Meanwhile, everything you have stated goes on to try and reinforce this case you are trying to prove while ignoring most of the evidence given to you. Every time someone says something in opposition, you either say "that takes too much time", "that is too difficult", how you have to "jump through hoops"... Or you try to turn it around and either insult the person making the statement, call into question their agenda, or try to sidestep the conversation entirely by pointing to how evil other companies are, or how corruption is a thing that exists. Being a moderator of this site doesn't grant me any rites beyond that of other users. I follow the same rules that everyone else does, and Dark0ne would not have even invited me or kept me around if I ever entertained the idea of using site tools to try and bully others into agreeing with me. I may speak harshly from time to time, but mostly because I have the unfortunate tendency to be too honest with people when they have stopped listening to more diplomatic responses. I'm sorry if you are taking personal insult, but accusations of me being unconscionable for not outright agreeing with you, or claiming that I would abuse power because of it is also an insult against my own morality or integrity. I'm sorry, but the person who cannot be bothered to look past the first few results given to them in a search quite well falls under the definition of lazy. A person who holds onto a singular belief (usually one they have been told by someone they respect) as an absolute (ignoring evidence to the contrary) falls under the definition of Sheep or Cattle. I cannot help how these definitions apply to your behavior here. Please explain where my logic is flawed here so that I can correct it.

A good number actually... Mostly those who are aware of the bubble that can exist and intentionally want to move outside of it. Those who don't, those people who can't be bothered to spend the handful of minutes... Well, they are also probably perfectly happy with using the most convenient and available system anyway... Which would be Google. Why search for a better wheel when you're happy with the one you have? The food served by McDonalds is often lower quality, more expensive, and tastes worse than locally owned businesses... Yet people will still happily eat there, still bring their kids there, still stop by on the way home from work.. Why? Because McDonalds is in more locations, advertises better, has food immediately available, and fits within their routine. This has nothing to do with the status quo (Not that you're even using it right here), but rather how people's habits form and how the concerns of one individual are rarely as meaningful to another. Neither of us are defending the status quo since we have both presented evidence to the existence of alternatives and mention specifically how easy it is to obtain this information once you can be bothered to move away from the flock of sheep and look for yourself. Hell, I even pointed you directly to several viable alternatives by name, by link, and explaining exactly how that service differs from google. If anyone here is defending the status quo here, it would be you... Since you have made every effort to try and claim how difficult it is to stray from the flock when this really is not the case. Congratulations, you are one of the cattle that realizes that it is cattle, but doesn't seem to have the capacity to either accept that existence or the agency to seek out other ways of being. It's no wonder you're concerned and afraid, you realize where the ramp at the end of the stockyard leads but can't be bothered to go against the flow of the herd because it's "impossible" or "takes too long". Good luck and enjoy being a McDonalds hamburger. You can't save the world, at best you can save the few who have the strength and will to follow along, at worst you can only try and save yourself.

5 seconds to ask on any forum on the internet. <25 seconds to bring up a full list of search providers in Firefox. If you're using Chrome or Internet Explorer... You still can, but since these browsers are owned by the companies you are searching against, some effort will be needed on your part. It's like going to a bank and asking about opening a line of credit... Naturally they will mention their own services long before mentioning others. This is how businesses, ANY successful business, works. They would not continue in operation if they actively helped people find alternatives. Linux is open source and works as an operating system that can still run a large number of applications (excluding games, since games are designed to run on Windows or iOS as a platform, just like games on console are designed to run on a platform). But at that point you might as well be yelling at Sony for not making their PS4 games work on your Xbone. I don't like Microsoft, I have refused to update to Windows 10, but also realize that the barrel exists and I will eventually be bent over it. That is how business works. Surprise, surprise, the companies worth several trillion dollars have more resources to throw at their products and services than an open source operation or some guy coding in his basement. Amazingly, those companies who have the largest portion of market share are also willing to spend money and resources to retain their market share rather than just sit on their hands or declare defeat. This is how business works. The problem here is not the fanboys, is not people who are happily drinking the spiked coolaid. It is that you don't really seem to understand how business works and seem more intent on complaining about a problem instead of spending the personal effort to help move yourself out of reach of those complaints. It is not nearly as difficult as you make it sound to distance yourself from Google, or even Microsoft... Rather you aren't willing to spend the effort or deal with programs and services which are not as well supported or developed. Working outside the system, or even exploiting that system is very possible... It just requires effort and willingness to deal with the complications that are involved with working outside the system. Try buying lunch on the barter system sometime. Despite the overwhelming control that people who regulate the supply of cash or credit have, the alternative can still be used when and where you are willing to spend the effort.

You're doing it wrong. It's only natural that when using a search engine, the company who owns that search engine will try to skew the results in their favor. Microsoft does this extensively by not only redirecting searches for Firefox or Chrome to IE downloads, but also by pushing every search made in Windows 10 and IE through Bing. If you're using Firefox, you can quickly load in an alternative search provider just by clicking on search bar and selecting "change search settings" This will bring up a list of search engines you have already opted to use and give you an option to obtain more. You'll still have to do a bit of reading on the list to find what you want, but it is still relatively simple to do. For chrome or IE... You probably have a harder task on your hands since these browsers are owned by the companies you are trying to distance yourself from. But, here are some reliable alternatives. https://www.ixquick.com/ or https://www.startpage.com/ - Parses searches through Google, but does not employ tracking mechanisms. In my own years of using this service, I've had no trouble locating the things I was looking for. About the only thing to keep in mind is that what you actually want will not always be at the top of the list. https://privatelee.com/ - Similar to above. Not personally used this service, not keen on the javascript interface, but this also cross-checks through Bing results. https://qwant.com/ - France based company who also practices without tracking or recording of searches. Searches done on this engine seem to be done in-house instead of through a Google scrape. Unsure if this means fewer results, but should not be an issue for most searches. Does not however support Web of Trust notifications in the results, so would not recommend this in cases where what you are searching for is likely to lead to spoofed pages or sites centered around shady practices. https://www.unbubble.eu/ - German based, EU focused search engine that uses scrapes from multiple other search engines to produce results while also not tracking or recording user information. https://duckduckgo.com/ - Yet another search engine that records no personal information. Search results seem to be obtained from in-house methods rather than a Google scrape. Supports Web of Trust, has both Javascript and lite interface that are protected by SSL encryption. Just to name a few. Many of these engines are hosted in Europe, or came about intentionally to undermine the sorts of tracking that Google does. This is not counting the handful of sites I found within 10 minutes of looking who just seemed shady, incomplete, or were employing their own tracking methods. This is not counting the dozens of other search engines out there that are geared towards a specific language or to get around whatever kind of filtering is already being imposed by the government of certain countries. There is no lack of results here... Only lack of effort on your part. Beyond this, if what you're trying to search for has no meaningful results, it is either because the results do not exist, or are not suitable (such as extreme pornography) or designed for public consumption (illegal activities) or both. If information is intentionally being hidden, it is not always done by some authority, but rather so that the authors of that information are trying to limit exposure only to those people who can spend the effort and have the knowledge to access that information... Such as the darkweb or geocaches... In which case, it is not your business to know these things and searching for them can get you more than you bargained for. As to your supposed video sharing/image sharing sites... I'm sorry to say, but most of these vanished simply because they were crap, had their own problems, or were bought out. There are still alternatives out there, mostly ones which are region specific like Nicovideo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niconico or smaller sites that are not as good as the familiar Youtube, like Vimeo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vimeo. Or the dozens of other video related sites listed at the bottom of that wiki page. Again, it is not that there are not alternatives out there... Just that you aren't even trying to look.

I wasn't trying to paint the past in some sort of problem-free light. But instead suggesting that each instance needs to be handled based on what is actually happening with it instead of paranoia. Yes, Google could potentially start having their own monopoly of the internet, and are potentially working towards this with adding fiber service to portions of the US while cable companies are busy sitting on their wad of cash and laying the same sort of cable they did 20 years ago. But for the most part, that is the fault of these companies who have been holding back improvements in infrastructure and keeping their services mostly stagnant instead of investing the money themselves. Yes, this is not much different than the Bell company pretty much investing all the money setting up poles and advancing the technology behind it leaving telegraph in the dust of time and pushing out upstarts... But isn't that the main point behind throwing a large continual investment into developing the technology instead of claiming it to be "good enough" and charging anything you want for usage of it. Google is one of the main companies around that is investing in the development and framework of the internet itself, and has even gone as far as making portions of their advancements open to public source or utilization.. Other companies can complain all they want, but they aren't actually doing anything about it, they aren't putting money into securing their own position, and are just relying on lawmakers (more easily bought than research) to rule in their favor. That, more than anything, should be the part that should concern you. We already had automotive and power generation technology essentially haulted for 50 years because of situations like this. For every valid case of anti-trust measures, there are objections raised just because those people who already have a corner on the market who don't want to cut into their profit margins to compete with new technology. Meanwhile drug companies sit on their new names and tweaks of old drugs just to ensure their ability to be the sole producer and distributor due to the muddled mess that is copyright law. The law here is very rarely the friend of the common man. Yes, some of this means that eventually Google might have that monopoly and be able to throw a switch and have most the developed world by the balls... But given that the head of Google is still a reasonably sane individual who actually has shown interest in the betterment of humanity instead of his own bank account, I don't see that happening. Given that it is a publicly traded company, without the benefit of a small coalition of shareholders, any complete flips of their direction or policy would likely result in a much greater loss of stock value than what they could possibly get from milking customers for every penny they have.

Except that history has shown the opposite... Companies have managed to get their foothold and regional monopolies entirely BECAUSE of regulation. With regulation comes guidelines, government oversights, and a host of other requirements that essentially bar anyone outside of those who are already established from participating in the market. Before the FCC and regulation, you could essentially just hook up your own radio transmitter anywhere you wanted and do your own radio station... Even in those days, it wasn't too expensive to buy the required electronics and mount a transmitter on top of a building or high post to reach 2-3 towns over. With regulation came the need to register these stations to specific frequencies so that they wouldn't start to overlap. With regulation came the FCC to regulate what was being broadcast and stations having to pay fees to make their station official, and to pay for the costs of the organization. The other part of things is the fact that regulation does not mean that the companies being regulated end up being any morally pure or trustworthy. The cable and internet provider industry is highly regulated, yet most the companies involved in the US are able to practice deceptive, abusive, exploitative behaviors because there is no room for competitors without substantial investment. Meanwhile the established companies have agreed to not compete with eachother. For most, this leaves it to essentially 3 options... Cable internet, which is stupidly expensive. DSL through the phone company, which is exceedingly slow. Or a mobile provider which is both expensive and slow. Within these, the only place where you have more than one company within any option is the mobile provider... and only if you live near a major metropolitan area. These companies know they have their consumers over a barrel, and have negotiated the regulations to ensure that it remains that way. While it is unlikely that someone new will enter the market and completely "dethrone" or replace Google, the potential for that to happen is still possible without huge investment. They would not have to meet whatever regulations Google negotiated in order to operate, but can instead compete in their own terms and on their own merits. But this has not happened because nobody sees any reason to spend the money and resources attempting to do so... Only Microsoft and forcing Bing down people's throats because they want more market share.

I would strongly disagree. It is very easy to find non-manipulated search engines... Including engines that access Google's search engine but from randomized locations so as to defeat any sort of information bubble that may be appearing around you from normal usage. Most of these alternatives are pre-installed on Firefox or even listed in Chrome, with most others able to be added without any difficulty. In fact, I have been using one or more of these services as normal behavior over the last 10 years, regularly, without seeing any evidence of information being closed off. This includes following similar search terms as others when it comes to world events that were glossed over by the Western Press. And it wasn't even very hard to do this. If you want to peek outside your bubble, it is very easy... even for something as tracked and recommended as Youtube. That said, this bubble is not something that Google planned and designed in their system, but is instead a side effect of their software monitoring what you click and look at and determining what results you are looking for based on either your past history or the history of others who clicked similar things. Even without using these alternatives, it can be very easy to break free of this bubble once you recognize it happening. Google isn't alone in owning a large portion of the internet. Amazon, Microsoft, and a handful of other companies have been chipping away at any idea of a Google Monopoly. But, if you've spent any time looking at how these companies are operated, talked to employees, checked the sorts of places that the higher ups are investing your money, you can quickly see that Google itself is a very different company. Most of the people I've met who work for Google like the company and claim that it is probably the best job they've ever had. Google employs people from all walks of life, and has facilities all over the US, providing jobs not only in large cities, but also rural areas which are near their data storage facilities. Even as imposing as their data storage facilities might be, often being more tightly monitored and secured than banks and places that store money or munitions, the inside of these facilities are still comfortable for the people who work in them, who understand the necessity of keeping information secure. In all the years that Google has been in operation, they havn't actually done anything that can be considered nefarious in the greater scope of things. Power only corrupts when you have something to gain from misuse of that power. Google has no sign of future financial concerns. Has nothing to gain from holding information hostage. Has nothing to gain from skewing information... Frankly, you have more to be concerned about regarding politicians and news reporting agencies these days. Thus far, the only reason why the average person can even read anything contrary to what these groups are spouting is because of services like Google, that makes it easy to find desired information quickly without having to prove security clearance.

It was never really marketed as a Co-Op Elder Scrolls game, and most certainly was never meant to be Skyrim Online. You're the one who chose to associate it with a single player game, and as such, your disappointment is your own fault. It's a solid game, and a great MMO. Is it like other Elder Scrolls games? No, but it was never meant to be. And yet, arguably, the best experience the game offers is as being a singleplayer experience with the potential for co-op. The quests, on their own, aren't too bad as long as you aren't some TES Lore snob. And many of them are more story focused than the usual "kill 15 rats" stuff that still gets pushed into MMOs these days. Yes, iirc, there are still some quests that have that, but many of them are related to exploring a point of interest and either dealing with a threat or unraveling a puzzle. Most of the instancing weirdness and balance issues are easily ignorable when you look at the game as being a mostly solo experience, or it was atleast during beta/early release when the playerbase was still fairly small and about the only people you saw were around town. But, much is this is why the game itself is pretty bad as a MMO. It's stuck trying to be two very different things and accomplishes neither very well.

Fixed that for you. It's the same exact progression, just one is more familiar and accepted. Physical money you have in your pocket have no value (burning doesn't count) unless backed by a bank or government reserve. Arguably, now that we're off the gold standard and the value of a given unit of currency is even less meaningful since it is backed only by its perceived value by other countries in relation to the rate at which that currency is made available for circulation. You cannot use that piece of paper (plastic) to do anything on its own, but instead requires a third party to acknowledge the meaning behind that currency and give you something in exchange, while also deducting their portion (and whatever taxes may also be present). Without this third party to facilitate the exchange the money remains relatively useless and the desired product or service remains out of reach. Scarcity in this instance is not a factor since it only relates to the quantity of goods that a third party is able to exchange, not the existence of the third party nor how much that third party is exchanging goods for. Even if you had a third party with an infinite supply of a given good or service, they would still want their cut for providing that good or service to you (bottled water being a close real world example since most of what is sold comes from a municipal source that is not much different than what comes from the tap).

Indie developers don't need to use any sort of DRM model. The definition of being an indie developer is that you are not tied to the hip of a AAA publisher to use whatever online or DRM component they have decided on (Origin, R* Social Club, Uplay, ect.). Even in using Steam as a publishing and distribution platform, many indie companies also sell directly through GOG, Humble, or their own site where Steam is not used for anything other than checking for a valid key and updating. In these cases, the application will run fine on its own from the program directory without even starting up Steam (Witcher 3 does this, among many others). This is a decision of the indie developer company itself and how they want to handle sales of their product. Disconnecting entirely from the internet, is technically unrealistic for most indie developers, regardless how they feel about the internet situation... Again, for those matters of producing a physical product which you then have to ship out to thousands of customers world wide. About the closest they could come is by having USB memory sticks or something to sell at conventions, or sending out those sticks to reviewers, as some already have. But this process of preparing this physical media is still fairly expensive, which ultimately means either high prices (people not wanting to pay more than $30 for an indie title) or less money for the indie company. The bottom line here, I think, is that you are looking at things solely from the perspective of how things are now in some parts of the world without considering that as time goes on, internet services will become more widespread and robust in the future. There is no sense trying to try and push inefficient, impractical means of doing something when the alternatives are becoming easier and easier as time goes on. Countries are working towards building up their internet capabilities constantly as more and more businesses are having higher and higher demands for bandwidth overhead and being able to serve their customers and clients.

My point is about priorities and value for your time that you have on this planet. No, that person sitting around at a bar for several hours a week is not necessarily having a more meaningful life, but they are doing something with their time that they likely enjoy and which is more practical given their life situation. If you'd rather sit in front of a computer and watch a progress bar for several hours, I suppose that is your choice, but cannot feel that it is a good use of time. What you want is not always what you get, and usually you have to make the best of the situation and just deal with it. Life is not fair and very few things exist for your benefit unless they benefit others more. It may cost $0.25 to print a disc, but that is when you're printing thousands of them. That is also ignoring all the other production costs and shipping costs related to a product. When it comes to those $50-60 games of yesteryear... on average, more than 60% of the retail price was related to shipping and manufacturing costs. That is with bulk orders of tens of thousands of units. Afterall, if you are paying $160 for an OS install Blu-ray, you will probably expect that the physical box have useful things like system requirements, or other infographics in addition to appropriate labeling. These components of the box design has to be: done by an artist, voted on by a board, assembled by another artist, approved by another board, have information that is present in the graphics finalized... Then have the design contracted out to a box company to print the box (after a lengthy selection process regarding box materials, inks being used, country of origin, and distribution networks), have prototypes of the box art approved and signed off by a board (assuming that there is no need for corrections)... And that is only for one language. This is literally dozens of steps, and usually several months of planning just for a box to be produced. The logistics of all this is exactly why it costs so much and why it was previously impossible (or damn near) for indie developers to get anything published. With a large release, this is millions of dollars spent just on the physical media. With the majority of the Western Market moved to a digital distribution model, there is not enough demand for physical copies to make these production costs worthwhile any more. There is a reason why game companies are willing to part with 25-40% of their sale price and give it to Steam to handle the digital distribution and rights management (DRM) side of things instead of try and keep with a physical release model. There is a reason why many brick and mortar stores failed or have had to switch away from software in order to remain in business, even in regions where internet access is poor. As for security... Nope. Physical product is extremely easy to steal and duplicate. This is where software piracy started. All it takes is one person with a large number of disc burners to take a purchased or stolen (stolen from a warehouse or store) product, duplicate the data on it, and sell it out of the back of their van. As business boomed, they formed contacts with other bootleggers, not only to avoid turf conflicts, but also exchange information, exchange software. When bulletin board sites popped up, they gained contacts with others in further reaches and started sending information digitally. This was the birth of IRC channels and Warez sites, where groups would start to compete to see who could release a working duplicated product first. These groups developed further with racing against beating various forms of encryption, drm, or activation. Even these days, physical copies are not secure and are often the first source of a leak before release. Games being swiped from warehouses, delivery trucks being forced off the road, it sounds funny, but this actually has happened. Even after the dust of a new release has settled, stolen game boxes from store shelves are an extremely regular occurrence, even with those annoying plastic boxes and wire cages that retailers use to deter theft. Those stolen game copies are lost money for the retailer, lost money for the publisher, and lost money for the developer. Physical product is far and away less secure, with or without online activation. The digital model just works better for those people who make and sell games. Game companies don't care about how long it took you to download and play their game, they got your money anyway. More over, game companies don't have the responsibility to provide internet connection services. Even in boycotting those games, it is usually reported as lower sales in your region due to other reasons and just makes the game company less likely to even care about supporting your region the next time they release a game. It is a no-win situation on the point of the consumer, so either you let yourself be bothered by it, or you make due.

There is a very big difference between having a slow internet connection and having no internet connection. No, most the world does not have a good connection or a good price for that connection. But this is exactly why you should try to be honest with yourself about your geographic situation and how it relates to internet service. Complaining to game companies about your connection or lack of download speed will usually just fall on deaf ears. Their launch model is based around digital distribution platforms for a large variety of reasons, they are not going to change their plan just because a region outside their targeted area does not have reliable internet. Pretty much the only instance where a company even took note of this was regarding the always-online functionality of the Xbox One, and even then it still requires a frequent connection to verify account information to keep working. Complaining to your ISP is more likely to lead to service improvements in your area... But only just barely. It's infrastructure that they need to spend a large amount of money on, so naturally pass on those eventual costs to customers. The reality is that for the most part, unless you can afford to move, you'll have to just deal with the internet connection you have. A 25gb game taking 20-60 hours to download is a shitty situation, but these are still first world problems. Just set it to download overnight, or do it in chunks while you sleep or do other things with your life. It's not an ideal situation, but you will just have to accept it when you go downloading these large games. The 0.0005% is relating to people who are financially well off to afford a gaming computer, have enough leisure time to spend playing computer games, but who live in an area of the world with NO internet connection of any kind because of being geographically isolated from most the world or because of local turmoil. They get 0kb a second, no movies on netflix or even youtube, and, well, are probably doing something more meaningful with their time than taking selfies and playing Pokemon Go. I know this is a very difficult concept to understand.

While much of this is true, you should remember that all has not been well in the land. Magic, for the most part is something which was tightly controlled by guilds on the mainland and even more tightly controlled within the High Elf society. Those who worked within the rules of the mages guild were greatly hindered in terms of fields of research or practice unless they wanted to be kicked out and forced to fend for themselves in the wilderness. Those who worked outside the acceptable bounds of the rest of society were excluded, branded as heretics, or slated for genocide. It isn't that there were not people trying to advance magic.. it's just that most of them ended up dead or claimed by one of the Daedra. This is why, 200 years after Oblivion, magic as a foundation is limited to outlaws, court magicians who can barely cast a spell, and a crumbling college. The Mages guild that was active in Tamriel was destroyed by the Aldmeri, who then went on to either eliminate or control anyone else with talent in magic. Through the course of history, knowledge was lost and the only thing that remained was the damage caused by improper use of magic. Technology is very similar. But what was originally stifled by easier magical alternatives lost its way even further with the century long wars and displacement that followed the Oblivion Crisis and eruption of Red Mountain. The loss of life that occurred in these events undoubtedly led to knowledge being lost and people being unable to invent or even maintain the mechanisms they had. But... We're also only seeing the far frozen reaches of Skyrim. Even in the golden age of the Empire, Skyrim was seen as a frigid backwater that was far removed from intellect and culture. In truth, if it was not involved in the processing and brewing of mead, it was probably not seen as a worthwhile pursuit in Nord culture... The rest of the world could be advancing quite quickly under the militaristic direction of the Aldmeri, but we wouldn't know about it since they're the "bad guys" who we're supposed to hate. Oblivion took place shortly after Morrowind. So naturally there would not be any clear sign of technological advancement other that Cyrodil being more mundane and civilized than the ashlands. Daggerfall occurred several years before Morrowind, but was also done in a much simpler way graphically so things like technology were not presented in any way other than "vaguely middle-ages european" .

The majority of games these days actually don't need a connection after they're installed. Steam in offline mode can remain offline for months and still allow access to things that have already been installed and played. Many more games can be run from the install directory itself without any modification to the Steam.dll file. Beyond that, almost everything sold on Good Old Games is DRM free, including many recent and newly released games. For those without a reliable internet connection, it is suggested that you familiarize yourself with what options are out there and ways to get around required online connections for games you have purchased. As for downloading these games... That can still be a problem if internet is simply not available. But at that point you are in the 0.0005% of the world who: has enough money that they can afford a modern computer gaming setup, have enough disposable income that they can afford to worry about the newest games being released, are in an area of the world where they can obtain information about these new games on a regular basis, is not spending the majority of their free time being social with other human beings away from computers, but still does not have access to the internet. However, given that we're conversing in some form of English, on a website which is somewhat off the beaten tract, I don't think you're in the above situation... statistically. If you are of that 0.0005%, Go outside and do something more practical with your life than playing video games for goodness sake. For everyone else, you're paying between $40 and $100 a month for internet anyway, you might as well make use of what you're paying for or just find more useful things to spend your money on than gaming. Gaming is a hobby, like all hobbies, it costs time and money. You can game on a very low budget sticking to retrogames, console games, or indie titles and only needing an internet connection on rare occurrences, or you can spend alot of time and money playing new and overly hyped games as soon as they come out. If you can't afford the hobby, change the hobby into something you can afford or consider another one.

The reason why physical discs are becoming obsolete is because none of these things are beneficial to the publisher and game maker. Physical discs have to be printed and shipped, this is money that is spent towards production. It is also lost money when it comes to copies which became defective due to printing errors, poor storage or shipping conditions, mishandling by people at the factory, warehousing, delivery, sales floor, or the end user. Along with the physical disc it becomes necessary to have a disc case, made in one factory, with artwork which has to be printed in another factory, shipped to an assembly plant for packaging with the printed disc, then shipped again to distribution warehouses. Throughout this line, the various parts may come from a half dozen countries (due to labor costs, laws, and materials) along with the import/export taxes of those countries. This also leads to lost money when it comes to producing too much of a given product since these items sit on store shelves longer, are more prone to being lost or stolen, lose value and are eventually discounted just in an effort to recoup the costs. There is a reason why packaging sizes and manuals have significantly decreased since the 90's and why it can cost 2-3 times the cost of the game for a collectors edition that often contains the sorts of stuff you used to get for free. Box art might be nice to look at, but the reality is that most people do not have the storage space for all the boxes of games they have and most the time they just collect dust on a shelf. Resales only help those businesses that resell games. The publisher sees nothing of this, the developer sees nothing of this, meanwhile it creates a market where people are more likely to pay the reduced price for something from a reseller than pay the full price to make sure the money goes back to the developer. The switch to digital is one of the main reasons why even smaller developers can put more time and money into making their games; there is less cost and less interference from 3rd party resellers*. Regarding piracy, physical medium has never done anything to prevent or slow it; it may have made it less widespread or more costly for people to run bootlegging operations out of their dormroom, but it was still very common even back in the 80's. There is a reason why game companies would often go to lengths to add copy protection to their games requiring among other things: a random word or phrase from a 200 page manual, code wheels, image decoders, special hardware plugged into the computer, ect just to discourage trading, copying, or resale. Naturally, most of these things got lost over time and may not have been included with the resale while the prompt to enter in this information was buried hours into the game or tied to something potentially missable which was required at a later point. This was probably more creative than more recent DRM models, but was still often a giant pain in the ass, particularly when your younger brother decided to tear up or disassemble part of the decoding gimmick. In most cases the DRM model currently being used is just Steam, Origin, or an account registration on your console of choice, and subsequently has led to a moderate decrease in the amount of pirated copies floating around. These services have also began implementing ways in which you can share games between family members or even play games remotely. They recognize these needs, but want to do it in a way which helps ensure their financial stability... understandably so. The other advantage of digital format is that a company can more easily patch out bugs, add in additional content, release expansions, and similar. While this may have arguably led to a perceived quality decrease among newly released titles (companies deciding to just fix it in post-release), there are a good many games that were released in years past which had significant gamebreaking bugs, performance issues, compatibility issues, and similar. Some of these were eventually patched, but in those days you either had to mail the developer (with proof of purchase) to get a patch disc, later having to subscribe to gaming magazines to get patches... all because most did not have anything as convenient as a 800 baud modem and IP number to connect to a server to download a patch a few MB in size that required your phone to be tied up for the several hours it took to download. And let us not forget the pains and annoyances of having to swap out discs both while installing something and while playing it. Nostalgia is well and good, but we're really better off. *This is of course ignoring the current generation of 3rd party resellers, where their site practices and lack of concern are taking money from developers directly. Such as the case of certain sites that promote themselves heavily for having discounts, but where these discounts are due to keys bought in bulk in regions where the game is cheaper to discourage piracy, or where the keys are obtained by buying them with fraudulent credit card information. In both these cases, the site gets their cut of the sale but the end user may have something they cannot use, or something which will be eventually removed from their account since the original purchase was done with a stolen credit card. In the case of the stolen credit card, the developer is not only without a sale, but is now slapped with a fine by the credit card company. In the case of indie developers, some of them are being severely penalized to a degree of tens of thousands of dollars just in fines due to the way these sites operate. These sites, naturally, don't particularly care since they are stationed in Eastern European countries and are earning their money just fine. If a customer buys a bad key or one bought with a stolen card, it is only the developer (the one who sold the key) and the end user (the one who ended up with something they can't use or loses that use) who is at a loss. The site earned their cut of the sale. The reseller got the money from the end-user buying it, while the end-user has no means of getting their money back.

Not exactly true, but close. The thing is that Oblivion will only run on a single core. So while you might have 2.2ghz total system processing power, this is being divided between the number of cores you have. You can get around this slightly by going into task manager while the game is open and changing the affinity to not use the first core (usually used by the OS and other older applications), In some cases, this will make older games run slightly faster since they will default to the second core which is usually under less continual load. Although Oblivion can only use 4gb of memory, and this was typical back then, windows itself uses nearly half that. Although you have a GTX 950 card... You are still using a laptop. Videocards in laptops usually perform at much lower specs than advertised due to power management, heat, and form factor issues. Best advice I can give is to take a good look at the sort of "lag" you are experiencing. If you are just seeing framerate issues, changing your lighting (turn off shadows/reflections) or rendering method (changing from hardware to software rendering) might help give you more frames. However, in underpowered systems, Oblivion can also experience processing lag. With processing lag, you can still have a high framerate, but the way the game (particularly NPCs) behaves feels like they are delayed. If fighting something like a rat or a mountain lion, you can sidestep right before they lunge or attack without them turning towards you as you do it. Or, you can run to one point, bandits will head to you, and while you're moving to another point on level terrain, they will still head to the place you were. In more extreme cases, NPC head tracking will be significantly delayed.