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

The case for why Google should be regulated as a public utility

rankscience.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 399 posts

Re: The case for why Google should be regulated as a public utility

#201

Post by auganov »

tgb wrote: post #131
auganov wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't searched exhaustively, but nonetheless you'd think there would be more specific proposals being talked about given how hot this topic is. There is very little precedent to regulating tech companies on such a granular level. The closest thing I can think of is various EU regulations that usually amount to shaking down US giants for money once in a while. It's hard to compare this to regulating something like…

So, to be clear, are you saying that someone should make such a proposal or are you saying that advocating for this change requires there to be a proposal? Because I'd be in favor of the former but I think the latter disrupts conversation and is unreasonable. The way you wrote your post sounded strongly like "I have a knock-down argument against any advocates until they have legislation written up." Which would be an…

Well, I'm merely saying that a lack of proposals indicates a lack of workable solutions.

By proposal I don't mean an actual bill ready to be passed, just a high level overview that does talk about the implementation. Obviously doesn't need to be a sound legal document.

I think it's perfectly fine and important for people to speak out against perceived injustices committed by tech companies. But yes I do also think that calling for "regulation" while being very vague is also a bad idea.

We've seen this play out with GDPR. Tons of people were (and are) calling for more stringent data privacy regulations. So EU came up with this monstrosity nobody fully understands in its consequences (because you can't). Enforcement is totally random. Some websites ended up just banning EU users. Many now come with very annoying cookie popups. Those that try to "comply" can never be sure they fully do. Very few people are happy or have benefited from this thing in any way.

I think this is exactly what you get when you want something done but don't know what.

Re: The case for why Google should be regulated as a public utility

#202

Post by ocdtrekkie »

pb7 wrote: post #178
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are also four national wireless carriers, which offer home service, satellite Internet (including, soon, Starlink...)

All of which can legally block, restrict, or charge extra for traffic to Google since net neutrality has been repealed.

Which, of course, could be a reason to switch to a different provider. :)

As someone who has things like a car PC to which I can't afford an Internet connection because all of the service is priced to include people streaming YouTube and Spotify all day... I find net neutrality an appalling concept. It's essentially a way to force ISPs to serve Google and Netflix's needs exclusively. (They are the majority of all US network traffic, and their bandwidth use as they expand to 4K video is basically drowning out everything else.)

Why shouldn't I be able to get a cheap $5-10 Internet service where I have to pay extra if I want to watch Netflix? Most of my Internet devices aren't used for Netflix, but I'd love to be able to afford plans for them.

Re: The case for why Google should be regulated as a public utility

#203

Post by jmoss20 »

jancsika wrote: post #175
tempsy wrote: post #18

I would argue Visa and Mastercard and payment processing at large as the top priority by far. It's crazy that we've given up control as a society of the only mechanisms for electronic payments in an increasingly cashless world to unregulated private entities who continue to jack up fees as often as they can get away with. Makes everything 3-5% more expensive. Ridiculous.

This is a beautiful implementation of a tactic to shift a conversation. OP starts with a seemingly related pivot to the topic of how to prioritize the regulation of a company like Google with the regulation of other companies. Such a conversation would obviously involve at least few points about why Google ought not top the list. (And hopefully many points given OP says Google is "by far" not top priority.) I was cer…

> X is the worst!

> No, look at how bad Y and Z are! They're so bad!

this is a... Sokal? (I think it's pretty easy to read the intent here, and more generally: internet comments are hardly rigorous proofs, and that's probably a good thing.)

Re: The case for why Google should be regulated as a public utility

#204

Post by wz1000 »

Isinlor wrote: post #197
wz1000 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's one idea: Make the index open and public, set up a public body to update it, and allow anyone to build a frontend. Access can be charged per query. Other companies/entities/governments will be allowed to mirror the index for essentially the price of data transfer. This is just something I thought up right now, and sure, there might be problems with the approach. But to pretend like there is absolutely nothing…

Governments can do that right now too. EU is trying to do that right now with Qwant.com where European Investment Bank invested €25 million. So, I'm curious will you start using Qwant.com from now on? https://www.qwant.com/

How are my personal decisions relevant? I'm calling for a government appropriation of the search division of Google.

Re: The case for why Google should be regulated as a public utility

#205

Post by jeffbee »

fuzxi wrote: post #185
jeffbee wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I was just trying to politely point out that this article is dumb and the author fails to make their case. Take the example of the basketball dribbling video. The insinuation is that Google serves YouTube results because Google is biased; it owns YouTube. The claim is that Google should mix in results from Vimeo. This supposes that there are worthwhile results on Vimeo, that Google can index them, and that peop…

I don't think the author's issue was that youtube results were ranked highly, but that they took up a much larger amount of screen real estate. Look at the screenshot in the article - half the page is one youtube video, then there's a video bar (all youtube, perhaps coincidentally) which is twice as tall as the last, non-youtube result.

I just produced a search result that puts a Vimeo video in the carousel at the top of the page. It was difficult, because Vimeo sucks and nobody uses it, but it proves that the arrangement of junk on the SERP is origin-neutral. The top result gets a bigger box.

Re: The case for why Google should be regulated as a public utility

#206

Post by stickfigure »

tgb wrote: post #143
stickfigure wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where I live, the largest public utility is being sanctioned for criminal manslaughter and burning down large portions of the state. So I think the specifics are rather important.

You've misread me if you thought I said specifics aren't important. Rather, that it's possible to advocate for "someone needs to figure out the specifics" without yourself knowing the specifics.

This is not materially different from "someone should do something!"

It's the something that makes all the difference.

Re: The case for why Google should be regulated as a public utility

#207

Post by jeffbee »

wz1000 wrote: post #198
jeffbee wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way that people underestimate the scale and complexity of Google's indexing always makes me chuckle. I'm especially fond of the idea that other parties will just wantonly copy it, like for research purposes or something. Also I'm sorry to inform you that the way the index shards are produced, arranged in memory/on disk, and the manner in which they are queried and ranked are inextricably linked. You can't make a…

> The way that people underestimate the scale and complexity of Google's indexing always makes me chuckle. The same approach that works for Google can also work for a public body supported by public funds. It can also use much of the same systems and maybe even personnel that Google currently employs for this purpose. I'm essentially asking for the search division of Google to be appropriated by the government. > Als…

There are currently zero governments and only about 4 commercial entities possessing a datacenter large enough to do the job.

Re: The case for why Google should be regulated as a public utility

#208

Post by scarface74 »

CPLX wrote: post #142
auganov wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, Microsoft was never broken up. That was the initial judgment. The case ended in a settlement [0] which didn't require all that much from Microsoft. The obligations have now long expired. [0] https://www.justice.gov/atr/case-document/file/503541/downlo...

That’s correct, they settled before any divestiture was forced on them, and I assume Google might too. But the threat stopped them from dominating the browser market and enabled the first dot-com explosion. We would be way better off today if there was a powerful countervailing force to all this FAANG consolidation. The current environment is deeply harmful to innovation.

The settlement did no such thing. The fact that not only Google spammed chrome ads on the most popular web page but they also bundled Chrome with third party installers led to the rise of Chrome.

Re: The case for why Google should be regulated as a public utility

#209

Post by scarface74 »

shakna wrote: post #87
sjroot wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo. Every device that I can think of allows you to choose a default search engine. It would be very easy for me to use something other than Google; they have no anticompetitive hold on how I explore the Internet and discover new services. This article is written by someone who would personally profit from Google’s regulation. It’s an ad for his company disguised as virtue signaling.

> Every device that I can think of allows you to choose a default search engine. Users, overwhelming, do not change defaults. Period. Unless there is a step where they are shown a range of options and select one, this is not an active choice for them.

So we need the government to come in because people don’t know what’s best for them?

Re: The case for why Google should be regulated as a public utility

#210

Post by jariel »

jancsika wrote: post #175
tempsy wrote: post #18

I would argue Visa and Mastercard and payment processing at large as the top priority by far. It's crazy that we've given up control as a society of the only mechanisms for electronic payments in an increasingly cashless world to unregulated private entities who continue to jack up fees as often as they can get away with. Makes everything 3-5% more expensive. Ridiculous.

This is a beautiful implementation of a tactic to shift a conversation. OP starts with a seemingly related pivot to the topic of how to prioritize the regulation of a company like Google with the regulation of other companies. Such a conversation would obviously involve at least few points about why Google ought not top the list. (And hopefully many points given OP says Google is "by far" not top priority.) I was cer…

"This is a beautiful implementation of a tactic to shift a conversation."

It's just a comment, not a 'tactic'.

Post reply on HN