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

Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 440 posts

Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google

#231

Post by fiblye »

orev wrote: post #82

Look, I get it — the issues with Google, Facebook, Amazon. But I can’t help but think about how AT&T and other ISPs banded together to claim they shouldn’t be regulated because they are Internet companies just like FANG during the Net Neutrality discussions. When I see just how bad ISPs are acting, in lack of competition, price gouging, content ownership, data monitoring, it really seems they were successful in shift…

The news can only focus on one major company at a time, but the courts can go after all of them.

Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google

#233

Post by fiblye »

bencollier49 wrote: post #212
kortilla wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would it make you feel better if I told you Google pays really well and offers nice perks for SWEs? It’s worth it to a lot of people to have a path to early retirement, even if it means the destruction of the open internet.

I think you're being downvoted because your post is too nuanced.

I think it’s probably because perks offered to google employees are meaningless to 99% of people. The damage and potential damage google is doing to the public is far worse than the fat salaries they pay their employees. If Google and Facebook paid the same wages as any other other tech company, people wouldn’t be as eager to join them and throw their ethics out the window.

Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google

#234

Post by bduerst »

panarky wrote: post #197
threezero wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Notice that no Googlers have a good response to this or the Eric Schmidt / Hillary Clinton connection. Google’s ties to the Obama administration were deep.

Which raises deep suspicions about the political motivations of this "investigation". Anti-trust is about companies using their market power to exclude rivals, raise prices, and hurt consumers. It's not about consumers overwhelmingly choosing a product because they like it more. Can anyone really say that Google's practices are more anti-competitive than, say, the dominant players in broadband or health insurance or…

Google isn't, and the fact you're getting responses that are dodging your question just goes more to your point that this is most likely politically motivated.

Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google

#235

Post by Fins »

summerlight wrote: post #112
aleister_777 wrote: post #13

Good. To quote an old friend who worked for Google: "I'm worried that if the rest of America knew what we were actually doing here they would literally come here and kill us..."

Interesting. I work for Google as well and I have a somehow opposite opinion here. Working here means you gotta fight through extremely complicated, thorough (and sometime bureaucratic) privacy, security and legal reviews by daily basis. Those teams have a real power to block any launches they don't like; Google give them the power not because of good-will but it's more about decreasing a risk of significant revenue…

Where were those teams when whatever the predecessor to G+ was called was launched and started sharing with your abusive ex's, people you had orders of protection taken etc. etc.?

I am sure they do review things quite carefully to avoid something too obviously illegal. But anything more than that? Color me skeptical.

Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google

#236

Post by euyyn »

el_programmador wrote: post #93
rayiner wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any antitrust theory against Google would be pretty abstract given that they don’t charge for either search or Chrome. But the pop up trying to get you to switch to Chrome when you go to Google search is pretty much what you’d put in a textbook to illustrate leveraging a monopoly in one sector to gain market share in another. It’s extremely concrete and intuitive. That doesn’t mean it makes the case, of course. But i…

On that note, even Internet Explorer (IE) was bundled freely, Microsoft never charged a dime for it. Why was anti-trust pursued against Microsoft then? Honestly, I see no difference between that scenario and this. If anything, Google has been a lot more guilty than for just monopolizing on a browser here.

> Why was anti-trust pursued against Microsoft then?

One example among the many things the court found they did was to tell OEMs that they wouldn't license Windows to them if they _also_ included Netscape preinstalled in their computers.

The stated purpose, from internal emails, was to prevent Java from becoming the de-facto API for writing applications, which at the time was win32. This was a gigantic barrier of entry that protected Windows' monopoly and they did all those shady things to keep it raised.

Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google

#237

Post by dylan604 »

googthrwy_ wrote: post #198
nsomaru wrote: post #174

I was the biggest Google fan ever. I recommended all their products to everyone I know. Gone are those days. I now trust Microsoft (heh! M!cr0$0ft, anyone?) more than Google which is strange given I grew up rebelling against MS’s technical desktop hegemony. I wonder when Google decided “doing evil” was okay. I wonder how the SWE’s and other senior people in this thread feel about working for a company that many now c…

I wonder how the SWE’s and other senior people in this thread feel about working for a company that many now consider scum. All their excuses and retorts can honestly take a hike: It is my honest opinion that if you still work for Google you’re selling us all out. Googler here, I understand why you may think Google is evil now and I'm not going to say they are a perfect company. But I think you should consider that i…

>Many of us work on things that people like and improve our lives.

Why is it that the things that Google creates that might actually "improve our lives" only last long enough to get people hooked into the G before said product is end of lifed?

I do not use a broad brush and paint 100% of Google employees as doing evil. However, I always think of the Grisham novel The Firm when thinking about Google. They lure very young, bright, talented employees in with the lure of very large pay checks. By the time said employees become aware of what the company actually represents, they are too entrenched into the lifestyles to "which they have become accustomed". At the same time, the users are lured in with free apps/tools/services that seem quite useful. Whether these apps/tools/services remain long term or not is a crap shoot, but G has you now

Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google

#238

Post by bduerst »

GeekyBear wrote: post #229
panarky wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which raises deep suspicions about the political motivations of this "investigation". Anti-trust is about companies using their market power to exclude rivals, raise prices, and hurt consumers. It's not about consumers overwhelmingly choosing a product because they like it more. Can anyone really say that Google's practices are more anti-competitive than, say, the dominant players in broadband or health insurance or…

Antitrust action was recommended by the career antitrust officials at the FTC, not the politicians. It was the political appointees (from both parties) who shut their recommendation that the FTC begin an antitrust action down.

The 2012 antitrust actions were settled with Google by the FTC, not shut down:

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2013/01/googl...

Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google

#239

Post by averros »

rayiner wrote: post #138
DannyBee wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW: It sounds nefarious, but the DOJ/FTC/etc quite often meet with all parties prior to taking antitrust action. That's because (at least in the number of times i've been invited to meetings with these sorts of regulators) the relevant folks are not idiots, and in fact are trying to understand all sides of the issue before deciding what they should do. This is actually what you want them to do, as there are rarely,…

I’ll note for the audience that such meetings are common for many types of prosecutions, even for relatively low level criminal ones. If you’ve every watched a TV show about a murder investigation, you know the police will talk to you and get your statement before they arrest you. The SEC will also send a “we’re thinking of suing you” letter (Wells notice), where you can respond with a PowerPoint presentation of “why…

TV shows are notoriously bad sources of information about the real world. In the real world if the police has anything solid which they believe points at you as the perp, they will arrest you first (possibly after watching you for a while). Extracting information from you is so much easier when you are intimidated and fearful - as anyone would be after marinating for a few days in a cell.

Talking to the police before you get arrested is just plain stupid. Let the lawyer do the talking. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRNc3Qic-Ks

Re: Justice Department Is Preparing Antitrust Investigation of Google

#240

Post by bduerst »

monocasa wrote: post #203
cycrutchfield wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Google would allow their employees to build IP for a particular political campaign? That is, they would waive their rights to the IP produced by their employees for the specific benefit of a particular candidate? That seems unlikely.

Eric Schmidt literally went out of his way to organize the Clinton IT infrastructure on ridiculously good terms. https://qz.com/823922/eric-schmidt-played-a-crucial-role-in-... The idea that he utilized Google resources to do the same for Obama while he had more direct influence over Google isn't a crazy idea.

Board members are not company employees, and Eric Schmidt is not a Google engineer as GP claimed. This is a stretch even by conspiracist standards.
Post reply on HN