Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Verizon wants a piece of Google's ad business

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 123 posts

Re: Verizon wants a piece of Google's ad business

#31

Post by yeukhon »

zeta0134 wrote: post #2

So, if I recall correctly, that "tracking supercookie" they're mentining in that account has to be injected in the headers of any request / response, right? Doesn't this mean it's easily defeated by HTTPS? Or am I misunderstanding how that works?

Correct, only encrypted traffic. See https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/11/verizon-x-uidh. Verizon was fined ~1.35M by FCC on this violation.

But one can still infer actual page a user is visiting by means of looking at some leakage of data. See https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/4388/are-urls-v....

It isn't easy but I am sure some people have done it.

One thing ISP has been doing for years is with DNS. If you are at home and you entered some wrong domain name, your ISP will likely present you with its custom search page. This is enough to understand what you are looking for. Furthermore, Google & Facebook aren't relying on cookies as the only way to mine your interest anymore, instead they focus on building profile for you when you use single sign on. For example, when you sign up for Stackoverflow and chooses to login with your Google account, Google may be able to learn you are using Stackoverflow.

Verizon in particular has been in the ads business for years, especially with their acquisition of AOL and on-going acuqisiton of Yahoo, Verizon has a big plan to make use of all the data they have, likely to provide a Google search or new portal for their users, much like AOL back in the days in the 90s and early 2000s.

Re: Verizon wants a piece of Google's ad business

#32

Post by pixl97 »

newsat13 wrote: post #9
kumarm wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't pay any money to google to use their service. We pay to Comcast and Verizon for the service they provide.

Huh? Did you read what I wrote? I said exactly that. Why does not paying money absolve Google of anything? So, if you sign up for my free SaaS service, I can do whatever with your data?

> I can do whatever with your data?

Yes, pretty much. It is very unlikely you are a monopoly with your SaaS, and it is very unlikely you are holding my protected data like medical records.

Re: Verizon wants a piece of Google's ad business

#33

Post by rayiner »

joshuamorton wrote: post #21
rayiner wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Google isn't the destination. Google's top services (search and YouTube) are just means for finding and getting to what we really want, which is the content (website, video, etc.).

Would you say the same thing about Netflix? It is just a means for finding and getting content, much of which is made by external entities.

Netflix makes a lot of its own content. But outside that capacity, it's just a middle man. My four year old uses Hulu, Netflix, iTunes, and the PBS app. They're fungible.

Re: Verizon wants a piece of Google's ad business

#34

Post by pixl97 »

rayiner wrote: post #19
Godel_unicode wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google doesn't have a natural monopoly in most of the country, and the ISPs do. Couple that with no ISP equivalent of ctrl+shift+n, and there you are (VPNs are just replacing one ISP with another).

Verizon doesn't have a monopoly almost anywhere. It competes with cable, and satellite throughout almost its whole service area. Now, if you want to argue "we'll, satellite isn't as good," you could say the same for Bing and DDG.

A monopoly and duopoly really aren't that different. If one profits by doing something unethical, the other will do it in a heartbeat. This is commonly seen in pricing in markets with view competitors and high costs of entry.

Re: Verizon wants a piece of Google's ad business

#35

Post by awalton »

rayiner wrote: post #16
awalton wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe someone can help me understand the distinction between these two. Verizon is the pipe we move data over - it's the road. "Google" is the service at the other end of the pipe - it's our destination. Verizon is unhappy with being the pipe, despite that literally being the business they signed up to be in. They have decided that the destinations make more money than they can ever squeeze out of being the road se…

But Google isn't the destination. Google's top services (search and YouTube) are just means for finding and getting to what we really want, which is the content (website, video, etc.).

> Google isn't the destination.

It is the destination, no matter how you try to reframe it. Google's just a destination that collects links to help you to get to other destinations, and pays for its service by showing ads. You can completely shut Google out of your life - block all DNS connections to Google's services, switch to Bing, turn on AdBlock, etc.

If your ISP is Verizon or peers with them, and your content exists on the other side of their network, there's absolutely nothing you can do to avoid them - they own the road. Common Carrier laws exist to prevent companies from discriminating based on the content provider. That's why Verizon has spent so much money to get around them.

Again, you can try to frame it however you like, but "Google" in this case could mean Reddit, it could mean HackerNews, YourCompanysWebsite, etc. It is literally a wildcard.

Re: Verizon wants a piece of Google's ad business

#36

Post by pcwalton »

pixl97 wrote: post #28
rayiner wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Google isn't the destination. Google's top services (search and YouTube) are just means for finding and getting to what we really want, which is the content (website, video, etc.).

Eh, Youtube is a Google destination. Lots of people make content for the express purpose of distribution on Youtube. Those people could put the content on other services, but they would likely have lower viewership. So, I'd say you're wrong on that. Google is the destination. About search. You don't have to use it. You could go straight to the content producers website if you wanted. Chances are nobody would ever fin…

> Eh, Youtube is a Google destination. Lots of people make content for the express purpose of distribution on Youtube. Those people could put the content on other services, but they would likely have lower viewership. So, I'd say you're wrong on that. Google is the destination.

You could equally well look at it this way: Lots of people make content for the "express purpose of distribution" on the Internet. The Internet, which is provided to you by Verizon, is the destination.

> About search. You don't have to use it. You could go straight to the content producers website if you wanted. Chances are nobody would ever find that content. As a means to fund the search, Google presents ads.

You don't have to use the Internet. You could walk straight to your favorite brick and mortar store or the movie theater. But you don't want to do that. Verizon wants to be compensated for its service, just as Google does.

> Everything needs to go encrypted. From DNS, all email to all webpages. All the ISP deserves is a bunch of random characters.

This is a better argument, and one I mostly agree with, though I'm not a fan of the moral implications in the word "deserve". Rather, I think, from a public policy point of view, the benefits of secure communications outweigh the interest from ISPs in monetizing their traffic.

For what it's worth, I'm uncomfortable with the idea that Google deserves all the advertising revenue, when it benefits indirectly from services that ISPs provide, sometimes at a loss due to regulation (being forced to serve remote areas and so forth, regulations that companies like Google do not have). I don't know what the right solution is, but I do acknowledge that it's a complicated issue, and Rayiner's point is not so easily dismissed.

Note that, as I stated before, I'm pro-net-neutrality in that it encourages a better public policy outcome, so you don't need to convince me of the benefits of the policy—I'm well aware.

Re: Verizon wants a piece of Google's ad business

#37

Post by empath75 »

newsat13 wrote: post #4

We all hate ads, no doubt about it. But I don't like the way media is going about accusing Comcast and Verizon for what the consumers brought upon themselves. Comcast/Verizon simply want exactly what Google does. AFAIK, Google does not "prompt" me saying that they mine my data and use it to show ads. In fact, I just tried creating a gmail account and there is no such explicit popup dialog that tell me this informatio…

The problem with Comcast and google is that in many cases they have a monopoly on broadband internet. If you need internet for work or anything else, you don't really have an alternative.

Re: Verizon wants a piece of Google's ad business

#38

Post by zkms »

newsat13 wrote: post #4

We all hate ads, no doubt about it. But I don't like the way media is going about accusing Comcast and Verizon for what the consumers brought upon themselves. Comcast/Verizon simply want exactly what Google does. AFAIK, Google does not "prompt" me saying that they mine my data and use it to show ads. In fact, I just tried creating a gmail account and there is no such explicit popup dialog that tell me this informatio…

> This is the same that Verizon/Comcast wants to do. Provide an arbitrary service (i.e ISP) and also do something else with the data.

> Maybe someone can help me understand the distinction between these two.

The difference lies in that it's rather easy to escape Google's purview -- if you don't like Gmail, you can pay for any one of multiple paid email services that don't monetise anything beyond your credit card. I do exactly that.

With Comcast/Verizon, it's a lot harder to access an alternative service -- both have spent decades building up nationwide networks and use their quasi-monopoly statuses in anti-competitive ways (at every level and scale, see stuff like municipal/local rules around utility poles and other rights-of-way for fibre and coax).

It's trivial for me to shell out a few dollars per month to access another email service that doesn't do ads and doesn't monetise my data. It's orders of magnitude more painful and expensive for me to access internet with something other than the duopoly of shitty DSL or shitty Comcast DOCSIS service.

Re: Verizon wants a piece of Google's ad business

#39

Post by [deleted] »

pixl97 wrote: post #28
rayiner wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But Google isn't the destination. Google's top services (search and YouTube) are just means for finding and getting to what we really want, which is the content (website, video, etc.).

Eh, Youtube is a Google destination. Lots of people make content for the express purpose of distribution on Youtube. Those people could put the content on other services, but they would likely have lower viewership. So, I'd say you're wrong on that. Google is the destination. About search. You don't have to use it. You could go straight to the content producers website if you wanted. Chances are nobody would ever fin…

[deleted]

Re: Verizon wants a piece of Google's ad business

#40

Post by yeukhon »

heavymark wrote: post #18
newsat13 wrote: post #4

We all hate ads, no doubt about it. But I don't like the way media is going about accusing Comcast and Verizon for what the consumers brought upon themselves. Comcast/Verizon simply want exactly what Google does. AFAIK, Google does not "prompt" me saying that they mine my data and use it to show ads. In fact, I just tried creating a gmail account and there is no such explicit popup dialog that tell me this informatio…

But Google and Facebook are Free, so giving are data is a way of paying for that. Comcast and Verizon we already pay for, so they are double dipping. Also Google/Facebook can prioritize their content over competitors, where is as an ISP with the changing laws Comcast/Verizon could. If Verizon wants to offer its services for free, then yes I believe if we allow it with Google/Facebook we should allow with it Verizon.…

The "there is no free lunch" argument has been used all the time, while I am okay with tracking to some moderate degree (I am okay if Google / FB shows me deals or relevant links), I don't think it's acceptable that free service automatically means service provider can take my data and my trust for granted.

You can opt out not using Google. You can probably use DNT (there are three options and it's confusing plus DNT isn't something websites and advertisers really honor these days, was a shit show), and some services also include opt-out button for certain data to be not collected.

But you can't opt-out not using your ISP since your ISP owns the pipe. That is a huge concern. With Verizon's notorious history of tracking users, modifying unencrypted HTTP requests, scares a lot of people, even if you aren't privacy conservative, you should be concerned.

Post reply on HN