Live data from Hacker News

EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

theverge.com

271–280 of 361 posts

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#271

Google operates an exchange for a digital asset, is a major vendor/trader of said asset on that exchange and operates an algorithmic trading platform to enable people to buy and sell on that exchange. On top of that the algorithmic trades are a "black box" with no audit trail, and no public insight into how it operates. If that sounds familiar, think illegal crypto exchanges... Obviously "ads" are not "securities", b…

[deleted]

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#272
post #76

As expected, the comments here seem generally in support of such a move. But, it is really unclear to me how such a move would improve my life or the lives of most typical users. Genuinely open to having it explained to me.

Online store sells great products. But nobody knows about them. Online store buys ads on Google to tell people about their products. People click the ads, and buy the products so the store can scale up and lower their per unit cost. Everyone are happy. Now fast forward a decade. Google drop their "do no evil" motto and jack up ad prices. Online store now pays 10 times as much for their ads and have to raise prices to…

Google drop their "do no evil" motto and jack up ad prices.

Raising prices is evil? Does this hypothetical online store never raise prices?

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#273
I wonder if the internet is naturally predisposed towards monopolies, or the culture of tech companies predisposes them to monopolistic behavior.

Let's look at similar industries. Better integration and data allows you to sell your product better, and more sales allows for more data and $$ needed for integration. No reason this vicious cycle only applies to internet companies.

Why didn't Ford buy up petrol stations in the US which could only serve Ford cars ? Market consolidation would let them negotiate a lower petrol price for all Ford cars and customers would struggle to switch without the same petrol-network or low-prices. Tesla is clearly demonstrating this as a car company with tech culture. They tried a 'super charger' monopoly thing, were nearly successful, but the presence of existing competitors made it difficult to pull it off. But Ford at its peak would've likely gotten away with it.

Tech companies are in an extortionate relationship, and the scale imbalance between their average customer (a 10 people mini-shop) and Google is so massive, that Google can afford to bleed many customers in the effort to find the maximally aggressive deal in the negotiation. How much can we get away with before we start bleeding customers, is a question that Google likely knows the answer to better than anymore.

Which brings me to why I think tech heads towards monopolies. It is "competence at scale". Every monopoly can expand vertically or extort data from their customers. But scaling vertically means more employees, more communication friction and inevitable mediocrity through IBM-ization of your company. More data is also not useful unless you can actually do anything useful with it.

That's where tech comes in. Tech companies can scale up vertically with products without needing as much human overhead, reducing the aforementioned friction. And most importantly, tech companies figured out how to actually make use of the data. It also helps that tech data collection usually involves clicking a checkbox and not sending thousands of foot-soldiers to take industry wide sensor measurements.

I came full circle as I wrote this comment, because I've just had an epiphany : "what is a tech company"?

Zillow, WeWork, Doordash etc. are on their surface, a light digital layer on a traditional company. I always wondered why they were considered tech companies. Target has a website and so does my landlord, but they aren't tech companies. In fact, the exact traits that lead to a culture obsessed with becoming a natural monopoly that define a tech company. A tech company has nothing to do with software, other than the fact that it has to do with data.

The cultural obsession with finding efficiencies vertically (control e2e) and horizontally (scale), inevitably turning into a gatekeeping monopoly is the core characteristic that defines a tech company. Both require a ton of easy data, and only that, is why tech companies write software. Software companies aren't always tech companies. But tech companies are forced to be Software companies. I've just realized that WeWork was in fact a legitimate tech company because it was a landlord obsessed with vertical and horizontal efficiencies. That's it.

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#274
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. When did the Chinese CFTC do something like this to any american? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_flash_crash#Evidence_of_m...

Just for balance, the US had Canada arrest a chinese national who had never been to the USA, for doing business with Iran (and then a bunch of other weird charges) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meng_Wanzhou China then "co-incidentally" arrested 2 Canadians. The whole thing is a shit show and it would be better for everyone if countries were more reasonable and agreed to avoid a "race to the bottom"

yes, but they were already there right? Not targeted out of country

and also just to be clear, I think this is equally bad when everyone does it

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#275

These rulings for a company of Google's stature/importance are always funny to me. How quickly would public opinion change if Google decided to just shut off their service in the EU for a day? Monopolistic breakups that serve the public's best interest are one thing. But how many people actually care that Google might represent a monopoly? Does it actually affect people negatively if the result is a positive online u…

I would love to see Google leaving Europe. I bet within a few weeks proper maybe even better replacements appear in Europe. Maybe even one of mine :) Google is an ad company. None of its services are critical to maintain a stable society. I would even argue that Europe would be better of without the American tech giants.

> I would love to see Google leaving Europe. I bet within a few weeks proper maybe even better replacements appear in Europe. Maybe even one of mine :)

Big words, but then I google your github and apparently you are planning to substitute biggest search engine, mobile OS and email service with 3dbriks[0], that, hilariously, "works best in _Google_ Chrome"? Come on now, there are multitude of reasons why European tech is not competitive and "evil American corps monopolized everything and won't let us in" is not the main one.

[0]: https://github.com/holoduke/3dbricks

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#276

And microsoft is walking scot free. They can happily control operating systems, office tools, a slice of search, ides, ads within their os, are allowed to buy large game makers and soon ai. As a bare minimum they should be forced greater compatibility with running their software on linux and ideally be banned from doing ads, ai and gamedev.

> microsoft is walking scot free

Microsoft is currently under investigated for using software licensing to prop up Azure.

> The crux of the issue relates to a 2019 licensing change enacted by Microsoft, effectively making it more expensive to run Microsoft’s omnipresent enterprise software on rival cloud services. Fast-forward to last year’s snowballing antitrust legal challenges, and Microsoft revealed it was making some changes designed to make “bringing workloads and licenses to partners’ clouds easier,” which it did to an extent — with the notable exceptions of so-called “listed providers” that include AWS, Google, and Alibaba.

So in effect, Microsoft is kinda making it easier for companies to run Microsoft software on non-Azure clouds, but only if they’re not using Microsoft’s main rivals’ infrastructure.

https://techcrunch.com/2023/04/20/microsoft-kickstarts-settl...

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#277

break every company up! Each "bet" in Alphabet needs to be broken. Each business unit within Google needs to be broken. Same with Apple. Break that up to between services and hardware. Force them to open up their new silicon. Why can't other companies use the H1 or H2 chips for their headphones? why are we letting Apple have the competitive advantage? Open up the App Store and force new payment methods. Microsoft als…

The funny thing is that breaking up these giants would create more corporations, hence more highly-compensated execs, and also more value for the equity investors (this is less intuitive, but I think that's what typically happens).

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#278

Google operates an exchange for a digital asset, is a major vendor/trader of said asset on that exchange and operates an algorithmic trading platform to enable people to buy and sell on that exchange. On top of that the algorithmic trades are a "black box" with no audit trail, and no public insight into how it operates. If that sounds familiar, think illegal crypto exchanges... Obviously "ads" are not "securities", b…

[deleted]

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#279
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The luxury goods market is not infrastructure. Not to say they shouldn't be broken up, but google is owning the roads you drive on, your car, everyone else's car and every parking space. The scale of the issue is just MUCH worse. Its not good that if you want the expensive child labor clothes, you have little choice but to buy from LVMH, but like, you can get other clothes. If you want to rid yourself of googles infl…

Neither is Google. If Google said they're going to disappear in 30 days, the world will move on and every single one of their services will be replaced.

If a power company suddenly shuts down and after the logistics nightmare that follows, they get replaced, they are still infrastructure. If just a few products that google make go offline for only a few hours, the economic damage that causes is in the hundreds of millions at least. Just because googles services could feasibly be replaced, it does not mean they are not infrastructure.

Re: EU suggests breaking up Google's ad business in preliminary antitrust ruling

#280
post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are fair points. Here is someone using blockchain analysis in 2021 https://old.reddit.com/r/solana/comments/qs3hb5/alameda_buyi... My memory of general sentiment is different, but again you can't prove something like that. As far as hard data, all I can think to offer is this breakdown of FTX's creditors by country, compiled from the bankruptcy filing. https://nitter.net/pic/orig/media%2FFiMwSncXEIMlb70.png The…

The Reddit link is analysis of public information, but the gist of that comment thread seems to be "Alameda is buying, I'm going to buy too" and not "evidence of improper FTX/Alameda separation". With the customer distribution, how much of this is downstream from the crypto industry avoiding high-regulation countries? The biggest two are the Caymans (22%) and the Virgin Islands (11%) -- how many of those people are r…

1. You're right, that link isn't relevant on second look. I do remember a specific thread but I could be misremembering and my google skills are failing me (or maybe the subreddit has gone private?) I'll concede the point.

2. They could be, but if an American retail trader sets up an offshore company to do their trading with to avoid regulation, you're not a regular joe anymore, you should know what you're getting yourself into and I don't have a lot of sympathy.

Post reply on HN