Live data from Hacker News

Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

bbc.com

221–230 of 352 posts

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#221

I agree they should be regulated. The world is a better place with lots of smaller companies. These big companies turn regular people into corporate livestock to serve the wealthy. If you were to analyze Facebook as if it were a country, the wealth gap among employees would be atrocious - The top 1% would own maybe 99% of the wealth of the country and everyone else would earn a minuscule fraction of the total value t…

IMO breaking up Google or Amazon makes as much sense as breaking up a tumor in the body without removing any of its cells and declaring victory. Go ahead, make some arbitrary cuts between Amazon, Lab 126 and AWS. Or go split Google into Android, Search and Cloud. That's a huge buying opportunity in both cases IMO. But if you really want to talk about a current monopoly in the valley, look no further than NVIDIA's 100…

> You wanna join the evil 1% in the valley? That's relatively easy. Learn how to code and ship working systems, especially big data and machine learning systems. That ability alone is worth high six-figures income to Google and Facebook (cue people insisting that's not the case because they don't make that kind of money).

Lol what the fuck are you smoking? Making 7 figures is de facto NOT relatively easy and NOT standard for any engineer (in the Valley or otherwise; even with RSUs). I mean, even the article says it's very rare.

> Even then, I consider the election of Donald Trump and the existence of his base a far greater threat to freedom than the worst of Google, Amazon, and Facebook combined.

Donald Trump is gone in four years, GOOG, AMZN, FB will be around for a very (very) long time. The comparison is lacking at best.

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you need to consider the amount of data Google is amassing from people using solely their services. And then sells that data to advertisers. If this trend continues eventually they'd be able to know more about you than even the closest of your friends. Is this really such a great price to pay for your privacy? For it to be easier to look up your friend's phone number from your email list?

I'm just curious, what data do you believe google gives to advertisers? I work at google, and I see this trope on HN a lot, and I always like to see what data people think is given away, since a lot of the time they seem to be under the impression that either Google's privacy policy is different than it actually is, or that Google's privacy policy isn't actually something that Google follows, or that it doesn't prote…

Alright, let's say that I have a general mistrust of corporations just because from some modest reading of history I know that if someone has power they'll abuse it for their own interest. So my opinions about Google and others are admittedly influenced by that. It has happened before - all it takes is for someone who stands to profit from a law to make it happen, and then suddenly it's the status quo and everyone's fine about it, not even thinking about the alternatives.

But since you said that what applies to Facebook could also apply to Google here are some examples - http://www.salimvirani.com/facebook/.

Finally, I'll admit that I have no concrete evidence that Google mishandles users' privacy. I will research that in the near future and perhaps my opinion will change accordingly. However, just the fact that they have access to all that data is insane. Potentially, Google and other advertising companies can know more about you than your closest friends and family. If that would be true wouldn't that bother you? Even if they don't abuse the data now who says they can't do it in the future if that would make them more profit and they could get away with it?

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#223
post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A company with monopoly power would be able to raise the price of its service to the price the market can bear. The 30% share Google takes from sales of Android applications is completely arbitrary and they could probably even increase it further without suffering any consequences beyond negative PR.

So then under this definition, apple is also a monopoly, as is pretty much any walled garden app store company (ie. Valve, arguably Amazon, Microsoft, and any other company with a platform that allows third parties to use that platform for a cut)? To be clear, in the US, there is at least one major competitor to Google in that space (Apple), so a price increase would lead developers to leave the platform. And in much…

Apple isn't actually much of a competitor where it matters: OEMs only have one choice which OS to license, which is why without major government trustbusting action, dozens of manufacturers have no choice but to build Android phones.

Google has no competition in this space, and any company that tried to break from them would go under.

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#224
post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you need to consider the amount of data Google is amassing from people using solely their services. And then sells that data to advertisers. If this trend continues eventually they'd be able to know more about you than even the closest of your friends. Is this really such a great price to pay for your privacy? For it to be easier to look up your friend's phone number from your email list?

I trust Google for privacy a lot more than I'd trust 10 different little specialized services that are fighting for their lives financially and don't have the decade of experience as the biggest target on the planet with no bad breaches.

And that's a big part of the problem: People don't realize privacy is essentially about fragmenting your information. 10 different little specialized services are far more private, even if they're subject to more breaches.

Thinks like your coworkers not knowing every last detail of your family, nobody you know IRL knowing about your weird online kinks, etc.

Your privacy is largely reliant on your different social circles being separated, your various identities being apart, and Google has made it so they can link all of your data together.

(EDIT @joshuamorton: Security and privacy are actually distinctly different concepts with very different implications. A former Googler told me this is not well understood inside the company.)

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you need to consider the amount of data Google is amassing from people using solely their services. And then sells that data to advertisers. If this trend continues eventually they'd be able to know more about you than even the closest of your friends. Is this really such a great price to pay for your privacy? For it to be easier to look up your friend's phone number from your email list?

I'm just curious, what data do you believe google gives to advertisers? I work at google, and I see this trope on HN a lot, and I always like to see what data people think is given away, since a lot of the time they seem to be under the impression that either Google's privacy policy is different than it actually is, or that Google's privacy policy isn't actually something that Google follows, or that it doesn't prote…

Given that Google can revise their privacy policy unilaterally at any time (and, as far as I know, they are under no legal obligation to delete or restrict access to data collected under previous iterations of the policy) I don't see why any of us should feel comforted by the existence of some mutable words on a webpage somewhere.

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>gmail, maps, photos, chrome, android, translate, youtube, drive, waze I think there are alternatives for all of those, many open source.

> many open source please. Name the open source alternatives that don't require my grandma to set up her own VPS.

Actually, many open source app platforms like Sandstorm and Cloudron offer managed hosting as well!

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#227
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it is an affront then. You'll live. >These 4 companies (and more) have done more good than all the goodness of your heart will ever do Oh, certainly. Can we start listing all the bad they've done now? Because I can't, not even in a hundred lifetimes, do as much evil as those four. >That for some to win others must lose. No. This is just flawed. Indeed. If you're living in a dream. However, in most of the cases, many…

>> You'll live. Millions have died from the perils of ideas such as yours so forgive me if I don't take your word for it. >> Can we start listing all the bad they've done now? You bet. List said evils and I guarantee you the sheer weight of the good in comparison will invalidate your claims. >> Indeed. If you're living in a dream. However, in most of the cases, many people are losing, and few are winning. Actually we…

>Millions have died from the perils of ideas such as yours so forgive me if I don't take your word for it.

I'd count the deaths due to capitalism deeming a cause not profitable enough to solve its problems, but you are going to ignore it anyways because it doesn't fit your world view.

Also, you are once again assuming I want communism, and that the only viable alternative is capitalism. You're wrong on both points.

>Actually wealth over time has increased for majority of humans so you're WRONG. Things are getting better.

Yet it has concentrated even more in the hands of the few. And quality of life, for many, has been down. I see you have a passion for cold hard cash, but basic things such as being able to live with dignity with a job, being able to get your illnesses treated, having good mental health are to be ignored.

>I come from and live in a 3rd world country in Africa. I've had a mentor and director in my previous start up who started with nothing (I mean dirt poor) and built up a company that makes something in the order of tens of millions of dollars per year. Certainly no Amazon or Microsoft but no mean feat either. He in turn has friends who do way better than him. Point is, if he can do it, anyone in the world can do it and people should just stop complaining.

I assume I know which country you're talking about from your history but I can't type it out because dear @dang will be angry otherwise.

I have a few questions:

* Do you believe all the people he grew up poor with and are still poor stayed poor because they're lazy ?

* Do you believe there is seriously an opportunity for every single person he grew up poor with to build a $10Million business?

* Do you believe all his friends that are making more are here because they were all poor people and they all worked hard, or simply because having money means that you are now always around people who also themselves have money?

* I thought we were talking about building conglomerates able to rival Amazon or Google? :^)

>I'm a web developer now. I wasn't always. Before this, I did some of that hard labor you're talking about. I welded and did grunt work all while I took Lynda tuts by Kevin Skoglund to learn PHP.

So you know exactly the path that is needed, how hard it is to take it, and still you disregard the need to provide everyone with good standards of living. You're the living embodiment of the "fuck you, I got mine" mentality. You've been beaten by the very system you are praising, and instead of wishing for the next generation to have it easier, you are telling them to look at how good things are for you now! But considering you are praising Thiel after, that's not exactly surprising.

Also, big news, not all of us can be developers. I'm not talking in a mental ability point of view. We still need a ton of people doing the manual labor you speak of. And we're not going to need millions of people building the next shitty CRUD app when their jobs have been automated.

>There is very little dignity in handouts. There's nothing more fulfilling than rightfully earning what's yours.

Yes. People are not enjoying handouts. I've had handouts, it's been some of the worst times in my life. You go through crippling depression, isolation, are being judged by everyone, including people like you calling it "handouts" when it's a basic goddamn right in the country I live in. You can't do anything because you barely have any money.

Now apply that to the people under poverty levels who ARE working. Go tell that to six million germans. Go tell that to the millions of americans living through that.

>I've noticed that what most people call the far right is basically a rebellion against common sense and basic rules of economics. I'm glad Trump won. If not for anything else, just as a statement that however far the left has gone, a subsequent and compelling statement had to be made. That statement was Trump.

Mmmmh, delicious white supremacist statements. Lovely racism and authoritarian reactions. Sexy removal of whatever healthcare the country had, leaving millions to die because they are still poor even though they are working, sometimes multiple jobs. Oh, wait, weren't you talking about millions dying from the perils of my ideas? You lived in a country that, until a few decades ago was one of the most egregious examples of how bad racism is for society. But hey, if it proves one of your points, who cares about the people who will actually be impacted by his decisions.

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#228
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every country that has a functioning democracy has realised that money is not speech. Every sensible person also realizes that this is not a solution. Have more money than someone else? Well, tough shit, your vote shouldn't be worth more. Stocks work the opposite way.

> Every country that has a functioning democracy that money is not speech. You missed a verb. And in case you missed it, every democracy has elections, and in that case, money is equivalent to speech. Good luck in getting airtime/a platform without paying money. > Have more money than someone else? Well, tough shit, your vote shouldn't be worth more. In a company, that's absolutely not the case. Taken to the logical…

>You missed a verb.

As if I such a thing. Thanks.

>Good luck in getting airtime/a platform without paying money.

Funnily enough, I was talking about that in a previous HN thread. You'll have to explain to me how my country (France) functions then, giving equal air time to candidates, no matter their size, or funds. We even have communists! The state pays part of the campaign, and to give you an idea, the 2012 campaign cost a grand total of 227 million euros (or 400, depending on what you count in). That was with fifteen-ish candidates, let's say five major ones and 10 smaller.

For an entire month before the election, each candidate has equal air time. No matter their budget. No matter their size.

>In a company, that's absolutely not the case. Taken to the logical extreme, should I have the same say in the operations of Exxon, even though I have no financial interest in them, rather than a shareholder with 3% of the stock?

If I have one share and you have ten, you have (or can be assumed to have) more money than me, and your vote is worth more. Exxon is an easy example because their actions have a very visible impact on society through, let's say, global warming to only give one example. In that case, you bet I should have the same say. Let's take a normal company. Let's also take a more reasonable amount of shares for a major shareholder, such as 40%. (See how Facebook distributes its shares, for example, and the end result is not far from it).

* If that shareholder decides that he wants to submit to a vote taking all that you're earning through your share and redistribute it to him, should you not have the same say as a shareholder? If no, why? Because he invested more money? And that allows him to get even more money?

* If that shareholder decides to dump their waste in the local river, should you not have the same say as a resident of the town this river goes through? No? You didn't invest enough, so society gets to suffer this person's actions?

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#229
post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only if starvation is the only option to prevent it from happening. Inclusion in Facebook's data collection is no longer realistically optional, thanks to their collection of data about non-users from friends/family, public records, data brokers, web trackers, etc. Being subjected to the effects of Facebook on society is also not something you can opt out of.

I view it like a private school. If you don't like the school then one option is to leave. No one is forced to use facebook. Leaving though is hard. And I'm assuming you'd rather use it but have some sort of do not track. I don't see that happening because their main source of revenue is you the user. So if you want to change the world by limiting Facebook's reach then leave the service. And convince others to do so…

I think you completely missed the point of my last post. I don't use Facebook, but that doesn't exempt me from their surveillance efforts, or the societal effects of their massive reach.

If it was as easy to avoid as you seem to believe, I wouldn't have as much of an issue with it.

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They push society forward along THEIR agenda. That agenda can be the most open, inclusive and diverse agenda ever, but it's gonna be the agenda of a corporation nonetheless. In my ideal world, you know who should be in charge of such a push? American friends, please, breathe deeply: The State should.

I'm largely a social democrat, but LOL if you think the government would be even a quarter as competent as Google at pushing technology forward. Just read any description from people who've worked at both normal government IT shops (really anywhere that's not 18F or the USDS) and private industry how they feel about governmental technology culture and processes. Like okay, investing in infrastructure, like putting fi…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN