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

Web by Google (TM)

landshark.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 496 posts

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#71

Post by [deleted] »

nightcracker wrote: post #41
zpeti wrote: post #2

It does look pretty tragic at this point. But it’s worth noting that every tech business so far was talked about as if it’s taken over the world, forever, and without 5-10-20 years they were overtaken. IBM, Intel, Microsoft. I think google is overplaying their hand in many areas, and this will inevitably lead to the downfall of their dominance. Just like most other large businesses in history.

Microsoft is overtaken by who exactly? In desktop & laptop Windows still holds a 87% market share.

[deleted]

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#72

Post by wwwwwwwww »

headmelted wrote: post #67
wwwwwwwww wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FAG are America's new Hollywood. Hollywood was an important leg to establish worldwide cultural hegemony for the US during the 20th century. With the internet taking over to shaping culture, the US had to adapt. And it did, and again controls most of the important channels that influence culture worldwide.

Poor choice of acronym. Please change it, there’s a reason no-one else has used it.

What about it?

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#73

Post by alangibson »

eiWit7oo wrote: post #5

> Google’s capture of the Web is a fait accompli. Only legislation will keep the World Wide Web from finally becoming Web by Google (TM). I really hope it's not the case, because then Google will cancel it. /s Search is probably something where there could be creative use of the p2p decentralized technologies. If when performing a search I could ask my contacts to look in their history if they have something matching…

I'm working in an architecture for a semi-decentralized, some-of-the-web crawler and search engine to try to address some of the problems with Google.

Basically affinity groups maintain lists of links (sort of like social bookmarking) that are the crawl root urls. Crawling comes from Common Crawl plus updates for recency. Groups can pool resources to run their own indexes and receive a share of the profits from text display ads.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#74

Post by reaperducer »

tomschwiha wrote: post #3

You can blame Google for a lot - however I believe if it wasn't about Google someone else would dictate the game. In the past it was Yahoo, MSN, ICQ, XFire, .. I mean those companys were so big (e. g. XFire for gaming streaming) but they failed to stay ahead of time - lets see whats up with Google or Facebook or Amazon in 15 years.

You can blame Google for a lot - however I believe if it wasn't about Google someone else would dictate the game.

Are you proposing that we don't do anything about a specific problem because there may be other theoretical problems?

That's like saying, "If this guy in this dark alley doesn't kill me now, a heart attack might eventually kill me, instead; so I'll just stand here and make it easy for his knife to find me."

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#75

Post by jachell »

staticelf wrote: post #17

This is depressing, we as developers have to take the bull by its horns. Simply stop using their services, advocate against AMP etc. But in the end, the US government will most likely have to split the company in order for stuff to really change.

I'm not convinced that legislation, created by politicians who are unfamiliar with the internet, will break up Google and transform the web in a good way.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#76

Post by reaperducer »

mrweasel wrote: post #50
tomschwiha wrote: post #3

You can blame Google for a lot - however I believe if it wasn't about Google someone else would dictate the game. In the past it was Yahoo, MSN, ICQ, XFire, .. I mean those companys were so big (e. g. XFire for gaming streaming) but they failed to stay ahead of time - lets see whats up with Google or Facebook or Amazon in 15 years.

It’s also not 100% Google fault. Chrome was needed to move the web forward when it was launched. And are they now suppose to make a less good browser to help competitors emerge? I’m not happy with the current situation and would hate to see Mozilla fail, but I can’t fault Google for the current situation.

That's like saying it's OK for someone to invade Poland because they got the trains to run on time.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#77

Post by ptx »

alfonsodev wrote: post #22
eiWit7oo wrote: post #5

> Google’s capture of the Web is a fait accompli. Only legislation will keep the World Wide Web from finally becoming Web by Google (TM). I really hope it's not the case, because then Google will cancel it. /s Search is probably something where there could be creative use of the p2p decentralized technologies. If when performing a search I could ask my contacts to look in their history if they have something matching…

>Search is probably something where there could be creative use of the p2p decentralized technologies. Has this been attempted before? does it have a name?

Gnutella, 20 years ago:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnutella#Design

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#78

Post by eqtn »

texasbigdata wrote: post #4

AMP still makes no sense. On iOS, Android and Windows it’s completely broken and friction increasing to grab a link to send to a friend in another medium. Not only that but it seems the page slightly degrades sometimes. For what? A theoretical page load time improvement? Maybe that’s naive but we already have “request desktop mode” to allow for bifurcated experiences. Why do we need a third thats seemingly even worse…

Disable chrome and make firefox nightly your default browser. Amp links gets redirected to correct urls. Works for left side news feed too.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#79

Post by walrus01 »

mattacular wrote: post #11
mnd999 wrote: post #8

I think we’re in a real low point right now. Gmail, AMP, Chrome, Android. So many peoples internet experience is from one place. With Amazon dominating retail, and Facebook under its various brands dominating social media, there isn’t much scope for other players. I don’t see another option than breaking theses companies up at this point.

Don't forget that Amazon dominates a lot more than just retail on the internet. With AWS they effectively run large portions of it as well.

They run large portions of it as essentially a gargantuan hosting company, in data centers in a few fixed locations.

They buy a lot of dark fiber, and IRUs, and wavelength services from carrier-of-carrier type big ISPs, but by no means do they control the internet.

But they are not in the same business of long distance OSI layer 1 ISP operations as CenturyLink/level3, zayo or Verizon are. Where I would be really worried is if I saw amazon making a serious bid to acquire a company similar to Zayo, NTT, KT, France telecom/opentransit, or Telia.

Re: Web by Google (TM)

#80

Post by dmurray »

alangibson wrote: post #12
texasbigdata wrote: post #4

AMP still makes no sense. On iOS, Android and Windows it’s completely broken and friction increasing to grab a link to send to a friend in another medium. Not only that but it seems the page slightly degrades sometimes. For what? A theoretical page load time improvement? Maybe that’s naive but we already have “request desktop mode” to allow for bifurcated experiences. Why do we need a third thats seemingly even worse…

AMP is the most transparent land grab Google has pulled. It's technically unjustifiable, is arguably value destroying, and as a bonus you can't disable it. It only makes sense in terms of trying to lock marketers and publishers into a Google-led ecosystem.

Why can't I disable it? Shouldn't there be a browser extension that just rewrites all AMP links to the underlying source (if I understand right, this always exists - the page may be AMPified but it's still served from the publisher rather than from Google).

This isn't a rhetorical question, I'm interested to know whether that would work. As I see it AMP can be just as big a problem just by being there by default on Google properties as by being something you, the consumer, can't turn off.

Post reply on HN