Live data from Hacker News

U.S. House committee approves blueprint for Big Tech crackdown

reuters.com

211–220 of 452 posts

Re: U.S. House committee approves blueprint for Big Tech crackdown

#211
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Platforms should disappear into the background. The great benefit of the web is that it presents roughly the same UI everywhere across all manner of devices and browsers. (The big downside of course is that it's not exactly the same). > car manufacturer selling only their own models... My car doesn't tell me who or what it's willing to transport. Yet.

Agreed, but many people are arguing that browsers should be able to alter the system outside the browser (e.g desktop shortcuts and notifications). I think that these things should remain under the control of the operating system.

> browsers should be able to alter the system outside the browser (e.g desktop shortcuts and notifications).

I've not seen the argument about desktop shortcuts?

Notifications are one of those features which has already been added and is a nuisance in 99% of cases, but I can see there being one or two use cases where a website sending notifications without requiring a full native app (and approval process!) is worthwhile.

The "should this hardware be available to the browser" fight happens for every feature.

Re: U.S. House committee approves blueprint for Big Tech crackdown

#212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they rank higher because their product is superior? I mean is there really anything better than Google Earth?

The actual Earth is, arguably, a bit better, imo.

Weird, I typically get websites in my search results, how do I enable celestial bodies?

Re: U.S. House committee approves blueprint for Big Tech crackdown

#213
post #204
post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

actively looking the other way in presence of fraud on your platform is only 'poor service'? goalposts moved to the moon.

Are they “actively looking the other way”, or is it just hard to detect when there is so much money involved?

i don't know, do you?

Re: U.S. House committee approves blueprint for Big Tech crackdown

#214

> potentially barring companies like Amazon.com from operating the markets in which they also compete Absolutely bananas that this haven't been fixed yet! How can Google own the entire ads market and still be allowed to compete in it? Obviously for-profit companies will abuse their positions if it'll earn them more money, and fines ends up being the cost of doing business instead of deterrents. How is Apple allowed t…

> Try searching for "Earth" on Google and see what the top hit is. Is that really a fair ranking? We don't even know, because no one knows how their algorithm is working, but one thing is clear, Google products consistently rank higher than anything else in the search engine.

If you search "earth" on bing or duckduckgo, google earth is the first result for both.

Re: U.S. House committee approves blueprint for Big Tech crackdown

#215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should they have, though? I agree they should have been penalized (ideally more harshly than they were) for their legendary anticompetitive behavior, I'm just no longer as sure that partitioning the company out into distinct divisions would have been a net gain for the consumer as I used to be, especially against the specific behaviors they were accused of. How, for example, would breaking up Microsoft into distinct…

> How, for example, would breaking up Microsoft into distinct divisions prevent, say, the OS division from enforcing the same anticompetitive requirements on companies licensing the OS? That kind of breakup wouldn't have solved that anti-competitive problem, but it would have solved others (e.g. the Office Team being able to use undocumented OS APIs to get an edge on competitors). Though, personally I kinda think a b…

> it would have solved others (e.g. the Office Team being able to use undocumented OS APIs to get an edge on competitors).

I mean, it might have prevented learning about and using new undocumented APIs going forward, but it would be in none of the newly-broken-up companies' interests to break the existing usage.

> splitting some of those divisions further into competitors

Even that I'm skeptical of - first, because you'd need enforcement to prevent them from simply merging again after a while (glares at Ma Bell breakup companies reforming into a few huge companies which usually deliberately avoid competing in markets), and second, I'm not convinced that deliberately fragmenting Windows into 2 distinct codebases is beneficial for consumers?

Even assuming you could avoid one of the two competitors simply winning the vast majority of the marketshare after one round of OS upgrades, you'd likely end up with mutually incompatible API surfaces, thus breaking one of the main reasons people like Windows - compatibility.

(I still claim, though, that given two initially equal products and equal resources, that one will probably relatively quickly eat the other's lunch. Look at what's happened almost every time a large open source project has had a high-profile fork - look at egcs and gcc, or OpenWRT and LEDE, or libav and ffmpeg.)

Re: U.S. House committee approves blueprint for Big Tech crackdown

#216

> potentially barring companies like Amazon.com from operating the markets in which they also compete Absolutely bananas that this haven't been fixed yet! How can Google own the entire ads market and still be allowed to compete in it? Obviously for-profit companies will abuse their positions if it'll earn them more money, and fines ends up being the cost of doing business instead of deterrents. How is Apple allowed t…

Bing.com has Google Earth first on the list as well.

I think you are overreacting to how many searches give Google products as the first result.

The only products that do rank high are literally the most popular products. What do you think they should rig the results against themselves? Why would that help people?

Re: U.S. House committee approves blueprint for Big Tech crackdown

#217
post #196
post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> WebKit on iOS has special sandbox privileges not available to other user frameworks. Okay so WebKit cannot be used as is, but then why forbid other alternatives [1]? Seems like a Catch-22. > It seems like an engineering challenge to expose these features to arbitrary 3rd party frameworks in a way that doesn’t allow these features to be abused. How does literally every single other platform manage this? AFAIK none o…

> How does literally every single other platform manage this? AFAIK none of Android, Windows, the many Unix-like OSs, even Apple's MacOs have such restrictions on browser apps. They don’t. All of those platforms are less secure than iOS.

> All of those platforms are less secure than iOS.

Do you have a source for this statement, specifically in relation to browsers?

Let's consider Android. I wouldn't automatically assume that using Safari on iOS is more (or less) secure than using Chrome or Firefox on Android - they are all provided by well known tech companies with years of expertise building browsers and a focus on security.

Re: U.S. House committee approves blueprint for Big Tech crackdown

#218
post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It takes considerably more effort to go to a different store than going to a different website. That seems like it must be true - Going to Lowe's instead of Home Depot takes getting to know a different store layout, and likely at least an extra half hour if you still have to go to HD. But evidently, by the way people talk about ordering everything from Amazon (despite its numerous problems) and look at you like you…

> But evidently, by the way people talk about ordering everything from Amazon (despite its numerous problems) and look at you like you have three heads if you talk about going to even say just Target.com, there seems to be some counterintuitive hurdle for switching websites that's actually worse than for physical stores. I think there is truth to this since I personally for a long time would go to Amazon for everythi…

We can look at general principles and see problematic couplings and incentives. In fact we could do this ten years ago before the problem grew so large, but there was no political will.

For example, by bundling product sales and web UI, what Amazon (et al) are doing is making it so that customers have to use Amazon's software to shop Amazon (and conversely they're prevented from using software of their own choice). Of course Amazon's software hasn't been designed to benefit the user, but has been designed to benefit Amazon - eg "dark patterns". Hence my call to unbundle the two by mandating API access. A public API is straightforwardly in Amazon's capabilities (it's literally just making a version of their website in a predictable format without all the extra crap), and would tie right into your "services to help the rest of the web be more competitive to Amazon".

Facebook et al are doing the same thing with regards to Metcalfe's law, and a similar remedy would be appropriate.

Not that I think any specific legislation will be anything resembling sensible reforms. Hell, we'll be lucky if it doesn't end up being a boon for big tech.

Re: U.S. House committee approves blueprint for Big Tech crackdown

#219
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users also "didn't care" about using Internet Explorer in the Microsoft days and the browser market was STILL severely handicapped with their monopolistic abuse. Same goes for Apple - with no ability to build an alternative browser engine the market IS handicapped, especially since Apple is abusing this restriction to prevent web applications from competing with applications from which they charge tax on every single…

Call me stupid, but what exists on android that users on iOS are begging for that only exists on android because of the "freedom" of the platform. I'd like to take a moment to say that android is just handicapped because I can't run a different OS, or screw around in the OS and change things to my whims. But no ones talking about that, why not?

Depending on your interests, that could be anything from: Fortnite, Tasker[0], NewPipe, Ublock Origin[1], Syncthing, xCloud and GeForce Now (until pretty recently[2]), RetroArch, the Dolphin emulator (as of iOS 14.4), and the most recent addition, NSFW Discord servers.

> android is just handicapped because I can't run a different OS, or screw around in the OS and change things to my whims

You totally can. I've been running LineageOS for a while, it's great. Improves my battery life, allows me to quarantine apps, gives me more access to the firewall for adblocking, and lets me get rid of cruft like the launcher. You can even completely de-Google Android, or install a community-maintained shim called MicroG that enables some of the features without the tracking.

The Android situation could be much better, this is why some people are excited about Linux phones. But I don't know a ton of Android users who are clambering to make it harder to use storefronts like F-Droid. I literally can not imagine going to a phone platform that didn't support NewPipe, I watch too many videos on my device, using the official Youtube apps would degrade the experience way too much.

I do think that the number of Android-exclusive things you can do is much lower than it used to be. It used to be pretty easy to make a compelling case that if you cared about flexibility at all, you bought an Android phone. I don't think that's the case anymore. But Apple still hasn't really stopped being Apple, so while the differences have become a lot less glaring, they also haven't completely disappeared. And sure, you can get some of this functionality back by jailbreaking, but in comparison the vast majority of the stuff you do on Android won't require root access, and all of the apps I listed above can be installed on a stock Android device without flashing or breaking anything at all.

Whether or not iOS users actually care about that stuff... :shrug: I suspect many of them don't. I'm not going to try and make a giant case about whether your average person on the street wants to be able to emulate Gamecube games on their phone. But I also don't really care; I'm a consumer and I want to be able to emulate Gamecube games on my phone. I'm a consumer, and I want to be able to install alternative Youtube front-ends that increase my privacy. I want to be able to block ads in my browser.

At the moment, Android provides an alternative for me. I'm very lucky that I never got locked into Apple's ecosystem so I don't have to make a choice between losing access to my credit card and being able to have a user-respecting Youtube client. But if you are locked into Apple's ecosystem, making a switch between phone platforms can be really prohibitively expensive and time consuming, so I sympathize with people who are in that position.

----

[0]: To be fair IFTT is pretty good, but it just can't offer the same level of functionality.

[1]: I know someone will jump in on this, but adblocking in Safari is just not comparable to Firefox. There is no way to get what I would consider to be adequate adblocking on the web in iOS.

[2]: Microsoft/Nvidia have only been able to launch on iOS using webapps, which given Safari's current limitations are arguably a worse experience than having native apps.

Re: U.S. House committee approves blueprint for Big Tech crackdown

#220

"A year after initiating the investigation, we received testimony from the Chief Executive Officers of the investigated companies: Jeff Bezos, Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg, and Sundar Pichai. For nearly six hours, we pressed for answers about their business practices, including about evidence concerning the extent to which they have exploited, entrenched, and expanded their power over digital markets in anticompetitive…

Where did you copy that from? I don't see the report linked anywhere. EDIT: I found the link further down the thread https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU00/20210414/111451/HMKP...

Yeah sorry had intended to reply on that comment. Oh well!
Post reply on HN