

It’s precedent-ish. The first court in Munich did the hard work from scratch. The Aachen court copied and pasted their logic into their own ruling. There is a strong chance that for the time being other courts will come up with similar rulings under comparable case conditions. But Google may be waiting for a case where they are not quite as likely to lose if they appeal. Funny shit can still happen, especially if the highest federal court can be convinced to rule on a case like this. So it’s too early to tell if this precedent has more long lasting staying power.






I read about some research (and it may have been funded by the socials, I don’t remember) that in a Coke/Pepsi blind test, users preferred algorithmic feeds. Most people do not think too much about what is happening behind the scenes and are happy to receive content they like. The unwashed masses are less concerned with things like privacy or moderation of content. I think there is a strong correlation between people who care about such things and their preference for chronological feeds. And we’re the minority.
An algorithmic feed will always be a better vessel to sell ads. Or in a more conspiratorial sense, to serve you “approved content.” So in the end, it boils down to money. Money prefers algorithms.