@Paranoid/Drunk AA helps some people to stop drinking, but be aware that it is substituting one habit (drinking) for another (meetings). Among the people I know who have tried AA, it does not address the underlying problems for why they are drinking too much. But stopping drinking can allow you to address those, if you want.
Why do you want to forget yourself? Why do you feel unloveable, or unworthy? And, more importantly, how can you cope with those feelings (which most everyone has in some degree from time to time) in a way that isn't just trying to escape? And what do you really want to do with your time now that it isn't blacked out? (As Baba Yaga might say - more artfully, of course - you must walk alone through the forest with your fears stalking beside you; if you obey the urge to flee into the darkness, they will hunt you down like predators -- far better to meet them as tame allies, or at least indifferent creatures.)
@M Dubz You may be alone for significant portions for the rest of your life. Things may not get any better. This may be very hard.
There is a quote, attributed to Joyce Cary (I've never been able to find it in one of his books), which, however trite it may seem, sums up some essential things about life:
"The truth is that life is hard and dangerous; that those who seek their own happiness do not find it; that those who are weak must suffer; that those who demand love will be disappointed; that those who are greedy will not be fed; that those who seek peace will find strife; that truth is only for the brave; that joy is only for those who do not fear to be alone; that life is only for the one who is not afraid to die."
@Anarcissie Did you read Lowery's article? Google makes money because people want to find content (in this case, books.) When you search for, say, Ursula LeGuin's book on Google, Google makes money. When you read LeGuin's book on Google, Google makes money.
You may not be aware, but Google is an extremely wealthy corporation, with a market cap of $186 BILLION dollars. The power Google wanted handed to them in their bid to grab the publishing business is economic - instead of buying a book, people will read it on Google, and Google will collect the ad revenue. (Which is also the revenue model for file-sharing sites like the Pirate Bay.) So Google makes money, while Ursula LeGuin does not. And you will blithely go along with this process, because you would rather have Google arrogate more property and wealth to itself than have the creator of the art paid. (I realize that Google has claimed that it would only allow portions of an in-print book to be read, but the fact that it was claiming the right to copy, distribute and sell every book that was out-of-print, even if it was in copyright, so the copyright holder doesn't get paid, and has no choice in the matter, gives you insight into their ultimate goals.)
Furthermore, IP law is not in radical flux. Google, Apple, Oracle, Intel, etc., are not about to let their patent and trademark rights be diluted.
I'm guessing from the tone of your posts that you are opposed to property rights in general, and would like everything (IP, real property, personal property, business property) to belong to some kind of anarcho-communist syndicate which would accrue all profits and dole out all wages to everyone (fairly, of course.) That might be a nice dream, but it's never going to happen in this country. What's going to happen is that people like you will continue to support the ripping off of artists to enrich the coffers of mega-corporations like Google, because it allows you to enjoy the work of those artists for "free".