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

Statistics professor at Columbia and Georgetown banned from all Google services

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 93 posts

Re: Statistics professor at Columbia and Georgetown banned from all Google services

#61

Post by falcolas »

dragonwriter wrote: post #55
falcolas wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The existence of alternatives does not negate a monopoly argument. Netscape, Opera, and other browsers existed when Microsoft was slapped down for IE. Google captures somewhere around 60% of the email market share - a dominant position from which they need to be careful about what actions they take. As noted in response to a sibling comment, the presence of alternative providers has proven to not to be a reliable rem…

> The existence of alternatives does not negate a monopoly argument. It's suggestive evidence. But no actual “monopoly argument” has been made to negate. > Netscape, Opera, and other browsers existed when Microsoft was slapped down for IE. Sure, but IE wasn't the monopoly they got slapped down for, it was the thing they got slapped down for trying to drive with their PC operating system monopoly. So the existence and…

> So the existence and market strength f competing browsers isn't even related to the market in which the monopoly at issue existed.

It was directly related, because it threatened Microsoft's OS monopoly by providing platform independent content. And so, Microsoft directly attacked Netscape and others.

"Judge Jackson finds that Microsoft was especially concerned about technologies, such as Netscape’s Navigator browser, that could support platform-independent computing and thereby erode Microsoft’s position. In response to the Netscape threat, Microsoft undertook a broad array of anticompetitive practices to increase the market share of its Internet Explorer."[0]

But you're right, it's not the alternatives that really matter - it's using the power associated with being a monopoly to negatively impact consumers. Google has an effective monopoly in many areas (including email), and as such practices which were OK when they were smaller are no longer going to be considered OK.

[0] http://www.pff.org/issues-pubs/pops/pop7.4microsoftmonopolyf...

Re: Statistics professor at Columbia and Georgetown banned from all Google services

#62

Post by dragonwriter »

falcolas wrote: post #61
dragonwriter wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The existence of alternatives does not negate a monopoly argument. It's suggestive evidence. But no actual “monopoly argument” has been made to negate. > Netscape, Opera, and other browsers existed when Microsoft was slapped down for IE. Sure, but IE wasn't the monopoly they got slapped down for, it was the thing they got slapped down for trying to drive with their PC operating system monopoly. So the existence and…

> So the existence and market strength f competing browsers isn't even related to the market in which the monopoly at issue existed. It was directly related, because it threatened Microsoft's OS monopoly by providing platform independent content. And so, Microsoft directly attacked Netscape and others. "Judge Jackson finds that Microsoft was especially concerned about technologies, such as Netscape’s Navigator browse…

> It was directly related, because it threatened Microsoft's OS monopoly by providing platform independent content

It's related to Microsoft's notice for illegally leveraging their OS monopoly, because of a speculative future threat it posed to that monopt by commoditizing the underlying OS.

It isn't directly related to the market at that time in which Microsoft had a monopoly; competing browsers we're not yet substitute goods for Microsoft's PC operating system, the way that competing email services are substitute goods for Google's email service.

Re: Statistics professor at Columbia and Georgetown banned from all Google services

#63

Post by falcolas »

dragonwriter wrote: post #60
falcolas wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a fairly clear line between bans for illegal content, and bans for unpopular content. The two are nowhere near equivalent. Not to mention, the user information on the account has likely already been handed off to law enforcement, at which point a grace period is of no practical consequence.

> There is a fairly clear line between bans for illegal content, and bans for unpopular content. Not really, as Google has no special power to decide “illegal”. Unless you mean, a line between band directed specifically by the state (where a government orders specific accounts banned) and those decided by the service provider. > Not to mention, the user information on the account has likely already been handed off to…

> Google has no special power to decide “illegal”.

They don't need to - that's been taken care of for them by the written law. Unpopular speech has yet to be considered illegal.

If the law enforcement disagrees with the service provider about providing a grace period, then law enforcement can get a court order. It's a small hurdle, but it keeps everything on the level.

Re: Statistics professor at Columbia and Georgetown banned from all Google services

#64

Post by sageikosa »

tweedledee wrote: post #24

In his tweets on Aug 15th he suggests that the Charlottesville incident has not hurt Trumps popularity. Kinda scary, but if true we should be addressing it as is instead of burying it. Edit: it looks like Trump has actually had a small increase in popularity

That sounds like the kind of thing that would trip an algorithm.

Re: Statistics professor at Columbia and Georgetown banned from all Google services

#65

Post by prh8 »

brightball wrote: post #40
snksnk wrote: post #30

Do not rely on Google and its services if your public beliefs / opinions do not align with the establishment, are politically incorrect in even the slightest degree, or if you value your privacy. There are good alternatives (preferably open source). https://www.privacytools.io/ https://www.prism-break.org/

Have there been some HN articles about good alternatives to Google services? I seem to remember Mail-in-a-box getting some support for running your own server. I've also seen kolabnow.com looking promising.

I moved to FastMail for email, it's been really great. I use it with a custom domain (multiple in fact) and its web and mobile apps are pretty good.

Re: Statistics professor at Columbia and Georgetown banned from all Google services

#67

Post by mcphage »

shitgoose wrote: post #59
asdffdsa321 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your claim?

isn't collaboration with Trump enough ground for ostracism? all of progressive humanity should spit in the face of that professor and demand justice. on a serious note: it is quite fascinating for watch US walk down this path. i see striking similarities between what is happening now - war with monuments, renaming the streets, "tolerant" left screaming for blood, witch hunt... between all of this and life in USSR und…

> isn't collaboration with Trump enough ground for ostracism?

If it were, we'd be seeing hundreds if not thousands of users getting blocked. We're not, so that is unlikely to be the cause.

Re: Statistics professor at Columbia and Georgetown banned from all Google services

#68

Post by exolymph »

brightball wrote: post #40
snksnk wrote: post #30

Do not rely on Google and its services if your public beliefs / opinions do not align with the establishment, are politically incorrect in even the slightest degree, or if you value your privacy. There are good alternatives (preferably open source). https://www.privacytools.io/ https://www.prism-break.org/

Have there been some HN articles about good alternatives to Google services? I seem to remember Mail-in-a-box getting some support for running your own server. I've also seen kolabnow.com looking promising.

Like prh8, I am super satisfied with FastMail. I've also heard good things about Protonmail.

Re: Statistics professor at Columbia and Georgetown banned from all Google services

#69

Post by liberte82 »

chroem- wrote: post #23
SamReidHughes wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because it's their computers.

This is the same argument that was used to wrongfully deny service to gay couples. You are turning a blind eye because corporations are attacking an ideology we disagree with. I do not believe that some people should be treated more equally than others.

It's not the same because white supremacists and other groups like this are not recognized by civil rights laws designed to prevent discrimination. These laws are specific and they single out groups that experience persecution due to history, culture or minority status, such as sex, age, color, sexual orientation, etc. Hate movements are not considered protected groups (in my opinion for good reason).
Post reply on HN