81–90 of 237 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"for not featuring other website some more" => for not featuring other website equally as own ones...
My point is that it's nonsensical that they would have to feature anyone at all.
> (...) connecting our users with thousands of advertisers, large and small, in ways that are useful for both . We truly live in the age of spinning, of euphemisms, where words lose all their meaning. All-pervasive advertising, the most insidious technique of consumer capitalism, is now an idealistic connecting of people (why, rather than fining us indeed they should be thanking thanking us for that, they seem to say…
I'd encourage you (and everyone) to read the comments in the other thread happening today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14643712 You'll see people baffled by this decision and generally happy with the service and products google offers. It's just a reminder to remember that what doesn't work for you may be pure bliss for other people.
Anyhow, I like google shopping (when I click the google shopping tab, not when im actually on the search tab), I can trust it more than other comparing sites. Also just like other comparing sites, it doesn't have all sources.
> (...) connecting our users with thousands of advertisers, large and small, in ways that are useful for both . We truly live in the age of spinning, of euphemisms, where words lose all their meaning. All-pervasive advertising, the most insidious technique of consumer capitalism, is now an idealistic connecting of people (why, rather than fining us indeed they should be thanking thanking us for that, they seem to say…
I'd encourage you (and everyone) to read the comments in the other thread happening today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14643712 You'll see people baffled by this decision and generally happy with the service and products google offers. It's just a reminder to remember that what doesn't work for you may be pure bliss for other people.
The EU has long used 'anti trust fines' as a way of levying tariffs against US companies.
That's complete rubbish. If they were really interested in helping customers get to the products quickly the products would be displayed underneath each websites search result. What they really want is for the retailers to pay for the privilege of having their products at the top of the page.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not a valid complaint. Fining companies for breaking competition law is totally legitimate.
Sometimes when you go to google search, it will prompt you to download the their app, download chrome, use their native weather, news, etc. It is part of how they iterate on their core search product. If they decide to show Google shopping, isn't that their product decision?
This is seen as a bad thing, because beyond the consumers are left with an unbeatable giant. Unlike normal market leaders, however, this giant doesn't need a superior product, but only apply leverage (given by their other positions).
This is the very essence of anti-trust / monopoly laws. Competition is a good thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My point is that it's nonsensical that they would have to feature anyone at all.
They are by far the preeminent search engine of the Web. They use that position to promote their own services to the detriment of others. This is against antitrust law and thankfully the European commission stepped in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Common origin does not disprove animosity or self interest. One wonders what NewsCorp or Oracle concerns are in ecommerce search, but then you remember that they had well publicized scuffles with Google. The last record fine was against a US company, as were recent tax related fines, patterns are harder to refute.
"patterns are harder to refute" -> there is also a pattern, how big US tech companies avoid tax payments in EU, it even has a name ("double irish sandwich")
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd encourage you (and everyone) to read the comments in the other thread happening today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14643712 You'll see people baffled by this decision and generally happy with the service and products google offers. It's just a reminder to remember that what doesn't work for you may be pure bliss for other people.
I think that is more that some people find great value in Google's product integration, such as getting map or flight results from the main search, and they are unsure as to how Google can continue to offer such a convenience in light of this decision.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd encourage you (and everyone) to read the comments in the other thread happening today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14643712 You'll see people baffled by this decision and generally happy with the service and products google offers. It's just a reminder to remember that what doesn't work for you may be pure bliss for other people.
I'm going to get down voted out the wazoo for saying it, but I will voice my opinion anyways. The EU has long used 'anti trust fines' as a way of levying tariffs against US companies.
And that while the reality is that there is a list of European companies/kartels receiving high anti trust fines as well for their behaviour.
The "problem" is that this never receives any interest in the states which only contributes to this blurred image that only US companies are getting fined. That is frankly untrue.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd encourage you (and everyone) to read the comments in the other thread happening today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14643712 You'll see people baffled by this decision and generally happy with the service and products google offers. It's just a reminder to remember that what doesn't work for you may be pure bliss for other people.
I'm going to get down voted out the wazoo for saying it, but I will voice my opinion anyways. The EU has long used 'anti trust fines' as a way of levying tariffs against US companies.
FWIW, companies in the US have long used 'anti trust complaints' as a means of harming companies they can't compete with (e.g. Microsoft, back in the day).