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

Break Up Google

tbray.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 196 posts

Re: Break Up Google

#91

Post by jaekash »

moksly wrote: post #62
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #13

I know that there's a quota of at least one "Google bad" article at the top of Hacker News each day, and that's fine and all, but I feel like the bar for them is getting lower. There's a pretty good case for breaking up Google, but this article doesn't make it. The word "monopoly" doesn't appear once in the whole article, which is pretty weird in an article about how to break up Google and the justifications for doin…

>"The world needs Google Cloud to be viable?" That's an argument AGAINST breaking up Google I’m not strongly opinionated either way, but google cloud being connected to the main advertising company is the one of the two major reasons the European public sector isn’t using it. Terrible support is the other major reason. Maybe google doesn’t want the public sector billions, but something like firebase is actually a bet…

> I’m not strongly opinionated either way, but google cloud being connected to the main advertising company is the one of the two major reasons the European public sector isn’t using it.

Please cite. And is M$ not also advertising[1]? If this ridiculous argument can get people to stop using M$ azure crapfest it might be just the boon I needed.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Advertising

Re: Break Up Google

#92

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

No court in the US is going to break up Google because Tim Bray thinks “The world needs Google Cloud to be viable” and “YouTube is too important to leave hidden inside an opaque conglomerate“. They May be broken!up, but not for these ludicrous reasons.

Read a little about anti-trust first. Matt Stoller has an excellent, approachable email newsletter called BIG about monopolies.

Re: Break Up Google

#93

Post by CobrastanJorji »

robbrown451 wrote: post #43
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #13

I know that there's a quota of at least one "Google bad" article at the top of Hacker News each day, and that's fine and all, but I feel like the bar for them is getting lower. There's a pretty good case for breaking up Google, but this article doesn't make it. The word "monopoly" doesn't appear once in the whole article, which is pretty weird in an article about how to break up Google and the justifications for doin…

"The word 'monopoly' doesn't appear once in the whole article" You're correct on that! It appears three times.

Ahh shoot, I must've misspelled it when I did a search. You are quite correct! One of the six reasons was in fact that the "maps business has a built-in monopolization risk," which is still a crummy argument, but it IS about monopolies.

Re: Break Up Google

#94

Post by [deleted] »

jhowell wrote: post #51
jaspax wrote: post #9

Here's the rub: I strongly suspect that YouTube is not profitable, or is just barely profitable, such that it would be difficult to run as a separate company from the rest of Google. This is even more true for Maps. Breaking apart Google would substantially risk those businesses. On the other hand, maybe that's a good thing.

> I strongly suspect that YouTube is not profitable, or is just barely profitable Why suspect when you can Google... "On an annual basis, Google says YouTube generated $15 billion last year and contributed roughly 10 percent to all Google revenue. Those figures make YouTube’s ad business nearly one fifth the size of Facebook’s, and more than six times larger than all of Amazon-owned Twitch." https://www.theverge.com/…

[deleted]

Re: Break Up Google

#95

Post by thereyougo »

nabaraz wrote: post #34

Is anyone else tired of seeing the same hate Facebook, Zoom and Google narratives every single day. So, we want to break up Google because it has gotten too big. What about Luxottica? It has over 80% market share on eyewear brands. What about Pearson? It has over 60% market share on testing market? What about Paypal? It has over 80% market share on online payments. What about Aetna (merged with Humana) on health care…

exactly. I'm not saying that those companies are perfect, but writing opinion articles only against them it's becoming a bit too much.

You can also find it in many marketing strategies of some companies. Take duckduckgo for example, I love them more than google but I'm kinda tired of 'Use us, Because Google is BAD' approach

Re: Break Up Google

#96

Post by SirLotsaLocks »

searchableguy wrote: post #59
aliante wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't demonstrate that it turned a profit though. Video streaming is costly and they pay over 50% of that to creators. https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/4/21121370/youtube-advertisi...

Maybe people should just pay for it? Oh no. How could they make us pay for the software services. Imo, this mentality needs to go. People spend $$$ in cafe, buy expensive branded clothes, transportation, hanging out with their friends, outside food, and so on. All of those are not necessary but they pay for it. They should pay for the digital services they spend most of their time on now a days. What's different?

or we could all move to something decentralized like peertube. It doesn't need to all be hosted by one company.

Re: Break Up Google

#97

Post by mvlpn »

kats wrote: post #38

Yeah, let's break up Google! I've been depending on their software for almost 15 years now, I use something they made practically every hour that I'm awake, and never paid a cent for it! I'm really getting a raw deal here!

To be fair you really pay with your data. I know there are different opinions on this topic but fmpov this is the worst type of payment.

Re: Break Up Google

#98

Post by ldng »

aliante wrote: post #71
searchableguy wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe people should just pay for it? Oh no. How could they make us pay for the software services. Imo, this mentality needs to go. People spend $$$ in cafe, buy expensive branded clothes, transportation, hanging out with their friends, outside food, and so on. All of those are not necessary but they pay for it. They should pay for the digital services they spend most of their time on now a days. What's different?

Except, they don't. People aren't willing to pay much for non-physical goods anymore.

And guess who's fault is that ?

Re: Break Up Google

#99

Post by aliante »

moksly wrote: post #62
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #13

I know that there's a quota of at least one "Google bad" article at the top of Hacker News each day, and that's fine and all, but I feel like the bar for them is getting lower. There's a pretty good case for breaking up Google, but this article doesn't make it. The word "monopoly" doesn't appear once in the whole article, which is pretty weird in an article about how to break up Google and the justifications for doin…

>"The world needs Google Cloud to be viable?" That's an argument AGAINST breaking up Google I’m not strongly opinionated either way, but google cloud being connected to the main advertising company is the one of the two major reasons the European public sector isn’t using it. Terrible support is the other major reason. Maybe google doesn’t want the public sector billions, but something like firebase is actually a bet…

>we would never chose to use g-suite over office365

Do these products meaningfully compete? G Suite seems to be the simple version and Office365 seems to be the complex behemoth.

I see them as a shovel vs a backhoe.

Re: Break Up Google

#100

Post by kryptiskt »

balanced009 wrote: post #8

These type of posts are now starting to sound like propaganda. Just emotional catharsis of some sort. There are plenty of large companies on this planet. Why do you focus on Google? and why do we see these posts frequently making it to top ten of hacker news?

You should be grateful, the threat of antitrust action is literally the only thing that is slowing down Google turning Android and Chrome into their own private internet. It's not enough, so far, so the authorities really needs to step up their game.

And the idea that you can't name and shame a trillion dollar corporation because there are other big companies around is pernicious. The idea is mistaken, no one should escape scrutiny because there are other bad actors. And if Google isn't big enough to be singled out, who is?

Post reply on HN