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

Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 77 posts

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#21

Post by rmc »

tferris wrote: post #3

Imagine Apple, Facebook or whoever controlled the Internet like Google does: How long would it take until they abused their power? If someone is dominating the web it's Google and looking at their power and how much traffic they move—their actions feel balanced and neutral compared to any other player.

Imagine Facebook or Google controlled the music industry like Apple do.

Imagine Facebook or Google controlled the mobile phone market like Apple do.

Imagine Apple or Google controlled social interaction like Facebook do.

Imagine Apple, Google or Facebook controlled desktops like Microsoft do.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#22

Post by dnda »

Tloewald wrote: post #20
tferris wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I don't get your point. You can be successful with your product on the WWW without employing any Google services, being totally independent. If people and other sites like you and link back to you your traffic will quickly skyrocket —which feels natural. You are not obliged to use any Google service like GA. Just use the Internet and its open standards and you are ready to go because Google left the Internet's…

Google have entered the Chinese market, compromised their values and still got their asses handed to them by Baidu, then pulled out. Not quite the same thing.

Care to support your theory with numbers and facts?

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#23

Post by rbarooah »

Sargis wrote: post #19
rbarooah wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that you don't get my point. The reason Google hasn't built a walled garden around the internet because they simply don't yet have the power to do that. You talk as if it was something they could easily have done but have chosen not to. I disagree. They just aren't in a position to do it. It makes no sense at all to say that innovation on the web has vanished because of the Appstore. We are in in a boom time…

Google's mission is to display their ads to as many people as possible. How is a walled garden going to help achieve that goal?

...because Google left the Internet's core like it is and didn't build a walled garden around it.

The commenter I was replying to claimed that Google chose not to build a walled garden around the internet because of their good character.

If they were able to do this, they'd be able to limit the threat of Facebook and other advertising based competitors.

They haven't done it simply because they can't. Not because it wouldn't be to their advantage.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#24

Post by zerostar07 »

To me this is another example of a fundamental difference between the Web 1.0 entrepreneur generation and today's superstar startup CEOs. The former's ambitions ranged from data liberation, information freedom and up to interplanetary travel. The new generation's ambitions end in their stock valuations.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#25

Post by brudgers »

tferris wrote: post #7
rbarooah wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of what has put Google in their position as the gatekeeper is that the perception of being balanced and neutral. If search was more overtly biased, Bing would step in as the neutral player. The more they consolidate their power, the less they seem constrained by this. I don't see anything that fundamentally distinguishes google from these other companies other than their present strategic position.

Sorry, I don't get your point. You can be successful with your product on the WWW without employing any Google services, being totally independent. If people and other sites like you and link back to you your traffic will quickly skyrocket —which feels natural. You are not obliged to use any Google service like GA. Just use the Internet and its open standards and you are ready to go because Google left the Internet's…

"You can be successful with your product on the WWW without employing any Google services"

It is often more difficult to be successful on the internet without devoting significant resources to Google specific SEO. Doing so without the benefit of Google search would be orders of magnitude more difficult, and Google is under no obligation to return any particular website in their results (e.g. Safe Search).

Google is a company just like any other, only, perhaps, more so.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#26

Post by rbarooah »

jkn wrote: post #17
rbarooah wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of what has put Google in their position as the gatekeeper is that the perception of being balanced and neutral. If search was more overtly biased, Bing would step in as the neutral player. The more they consolidate their power, the less they seem constrained by this. I don't see anything that fundamentally distinguishes google from these other companies other than their present strategic position.

I don't see anything that fundamentally distinguishes google from these other companies other than their present strategic position. There is I think a difference in company culture. Sure, it is not something you can measure like market capitalization or dividends, but that doesn't make it insignificant. It is common for people to say that all big companies are equivalent in that they just look for the best strategy…

For all the reports that Google is full of idealists, I hear just as many that it's a very 'careerist' place, and it's clearly attractive to people who want to make money as much as it is to those who believe in internet freedom.

I agree that culture is not irrelevant. I don't even dispute that Google attracts people who have a certain ideology. I just don't think that Google's ideology is all that clear or meaningful.

When they use words like "openness" or "freedom" these become a rorschach onto which people project their own hopes.

I would like to see Google succeed by proving the competitive advantage of openness, not by moralizing about others who are choosing to test another theory of how to provide value.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#27

Post by tferris »

rbarooah wrote: post #11
tferris wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I don't get your point. You can be successful with your product on the WWW without employing any Google services, being totally independent. If people and other sites like you and link back to you your traffic will quickly skyrocket —which feels natural. You are not obliged to use any Google service like GA. Just use the Internet and its open standards and you are ready to go because Google left the Internet's…

I agree that you don't get my point. The reason Google hasn't built a walled garden around the internet because they simply don't yet have the power to do that. You talk as if it was something they could easily have done but have chosen not to. I disagree. They just aren't in a position to do it. It makes no sense at all to say that innovation on the web has vanished because of the Appstore. We are in in a boom time…

Pardon, you are totally misleading.

Google could do this—there are multiple options to silently wallgarden the user. Just check how much traffic Google moves. If they want they could arbitrarily redirect traffic and subtly punish user's not using their tools.

But that's not their culture. Just look at their products, how far they pushing the boundaries and still stay open, give back and contribute to the community. Look at V8, Dart, Go—all open, all free, all top-notch, all following the Internet's principles and look at Apple, FB—I see no groundbreaking innovation that's free or not protecting their walled garden. Even if Google has some hidden agenda with their products (like with Chrome) the products are always best-of-breed and never deadlock the user.

The point is: Google benefits of an open Internet, their business model is fully based on an open Internet. Therefore they will do everything to keep the Internet neutral, free and decentralized. In contrast, the bizmodels of Apple and FB do not rely on these values, they need walled gardens. Enough reasons to trust them less.

RE-EDIT: Took out later added passages as wished.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#28

Post by j_col »

tferris wrote: post #27
rbarooah wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that you don't get my point. The reason Google hasn't built a walled garden around the internet because they simply don't yet have the power to do that. You talk as if it was something they could easily have done but have chosen not to. I disagree. They just aren't in a position to do it. It makes no sense at all to say that innovation on the web has vanished because of the Appstore. We are in in a boom time…

Pardon, you are totally misleading. Google could do this—there are multiple options to silently wallgarden the user. Just check how much traffic Google moves. If they want they could arbitrarily redirect traffic and subtly punish user's not using their tools. But that's not their culture. Just look at their products, how far they pushing the boundaries and still stay open, give back and contribute to the community. L…

Facebook have given back plenty of open source to the dev community. Scribe (their federated logging server) and HipHop (their PHP compiler) come to mind immediately, but there may be others.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#29

Post by jessriedel »

gaius wrote: post #16
sparknlaunch12 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Avoidance or evasion? If a company is compliant then it is up to government to intervene and change laws. However law change should apply to all entities, on or off line.

Indeed. But Eric Schmidt doesn't get to whine about e.g. education in the UK, without ponying up the cash.

There's a pretty important distinction between a government-provided service and the government's infringement of a (negative) right, especially when it comes to who gets to complain based on the amount of taxes they pay. The government doesn't pay money to not censor the internet.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#30

Post by eternalban »

tferris wrote: post #3

Imagine Apple, Facebook or whoever controlled the Internet like Google does: How long would it take until they abused their power? If someone is dominating the web it's Google and looking at their power and how much traffic they move—their actions feel balanced and neutral compared to any other player.

> their actions feel balanced and neutral compared to any other player.

There are distinct business models at play here and that should be noted before arriving at a conclusion that Google is a benevolent corporate actor. The fact that Google (or any company for that matter) can dominate and observe traffic patterns and content should be a matter of concern to the democratically [in the contemporary sense] minded individuals.

Post reply on HN