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

DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 1001 posts

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#791

Post by vivzkestrel »

SpEd3Y wrote: post #417

Arguably out of the big 4 (Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon) Google gave the most back to humanity: Android, Chromium, Kubernetes, Google Office suite, the Go programming language, Tensor Flow, Alpha Fold (and Google DeepMind), donating to Linux, etc. All these are things everyone has access to precisely because Google is such a big player and can afford to lose money on innovation that fails. What did Microsoft and…

microsoft gave us VSCode from the top of my head, I could probably list 50 other things

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#792

Post by asveikau »

move-on-by wrote: post #268
IncreasePosts wrote: post #172

What kind of continuity can be expected when the head of the DoJ is a political appointee by the president, and we're getting a new president in 2 months with radically different ideas compared to our current one?

I’m not sure, but per the article it’s a continuation of it’s beginning: > The case was filed under the first Trump administration and continued under President Joe Biden.

Trump is known to change his mind about stuff on a whim or who he talks to most recently, I guess we'll see.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#793

Post by astrodust »

pjc50 wrote: post #548
rkharsan64 wrote: post #510

People here seem to be underestimating the advantages that Google gets just because of Chrome: - When you sign in to Google, you sign in browser-wide. Google now gets all of your browsing data, perfect for advertising. (If you ever doubt it, go check out Google Takeout. You'll be shocked at the amount of data you see there.) - They have special APIs and features that they get to use, and nobody else. Only because the…

The problem is this: - the browser is undeniably critical as everyone's window through which they view the online world; - the user gains a huge amount of value by a browser being integrated into the OS, webviews in other applications, etc - browsers aren't really a self funding product - having a single for-profit US advertising company control everyone's view of the online world, however slightly (e.g. by obstructi…

Firefox has made a mountain of money off of their tiny market share. Chrome as a company would instantly rake in billions.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#794

Post by hightrix »

freedomben wrote: post #761

> They are also prepared to seek a requirement that Google share more information with advertisers and give them more control over where their ads appear. I don't think Google are fully clean in all this by any stretch, but for all the people saying that Google is just privacy-violating data junkies, did you catch that aspect of the DOJ statement?? The DOJ wants the advertisers to have MORE information (about us). Th…

I definitely glossed over this line. This line of thinking makes me worried that someone in the upcoming government will get the "good" idea of trying to ban adblockers.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#795

Post by lenerdenator »

criddell wrote: post #713
throwaway2037 wrote: post #706

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You raise some very important points. Specifically, this one: > browsers aren't really a self funding product I feel the same. I also feel the same about a modern C library and C compiler (and C++, if you like). They are essential to build any modern system and applications. Yet, those are also (mostly) no longer self-funding products. What do you think will happen if Google is forced to divest Chrome?

> What do you think will happen if Google is forced to divest Chrome? The new Chrome company will struggle for a year or two then Apple will try to buy it but lose out after Oracle submits a higher bid.

If the choice is no internet, forever, or giving Oracle money, I'm gonna live in 1990 from here on out.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#796

Post by Spivak »

oefrha wrote: post #56
Spivak wrote: post #29

Weird that this is so doom and gloom, the world's most popular browser decoupled from the ad machine. What's not to love? People champion Firefox and Brave constantly and they're independent browsers.

Brave is not an independent browser, the majority of development comes for free through Chromium, funded by… Google. Firefox by Mozilla Corp survives on loads of cash from… Google. Whoever’s going to pay for the acquisition and the shit ton of ongoing development costs will have to milk it a lot harder than Google (unless the buyer is something like Microsoft, but what’s the point then). A browser alone, especially t…

I think there's an implicit assumption here that Google isn't milking the browser for all it's worth. It isn't as if Google is footing the bill for all those ongoing costs for nothing. I think the argument that Chrome avoids some general badness because Google gets value from a purely strategic interest isn't without merit but even that value is captured eventually. Sure they'll probably sell their default search placement to Google for a pretty penny to sustain development just like Firefox but I consider that a strict improvement over the status quo because Google has less direct power over the new company.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#797

Post by xeonmc »

philistine wrote: post #250
EMIRELADERO wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It sounds like the end goal of this is to enrich other companies , not customers. In this case, the "customers" are other companies. Antitrust markets can be defined broadly or narrowly. In this case, the market was "general web search advertising" (among others). Who are the consumers in this market? People and companies that want their ads placed where (and to who) it matters.

Exactly. Everybody thinks they're the consumer, but often times consumers are other companies.

They may think they are consumers, but most often they are the consumables.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#798

Post by burnte »

lesuorac wrote: post #622
addicted wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google isn’t “getting targeted”. But to answer your question. 1. Microsoft gets left alone - Really? You may want to ask the closest adult near you about this. 2. Amazon - The government has looked into Amazon multiple times. It’s hard to see where Amazon does anything to illegally use its monopoly (they don’t use their shopping advantage to cross sell AWS in any way, or Vice versa). Amazon is genuinely not a bad mon…

> It’s hard to see where Amazon does anything to illegally use its monopoly Amazon literally uses the marketplace data to determine which products to make Amazon Basic versions of. I think the better argument of "Google isn't getting targeted" is that literally all of those companies have been sued in the past (and will be in the future and probably currently have cases being worked against them).

> Amazon literally uses the marketplace data to determine which products to make Amazon Basic versions of.

So does BestBuy, Kroger, WalMart, drug manufacturers, and literally ever single other industry where there are generics, private brands, and copycat products/services of all types.

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#799

Post by nfw2 »

lolinder wrote: post #629
pjc50 wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is this: - the browser is undeniably critical as everyone's window through which they view the online world; - the user gains a huge amount of value by a browser being integrated into the OS, webviews in other applications, etc - browsers aren't really a self funding product - having a single for-profit US advertising company control everyone's view of the online world, however slightly (e.g. by obstructi…

Any potential buyer will have to be looking to use Chrome to accomplish the same kinds of synergies that Google is using it for, to get ahead in some adjacent market. Depending on the buyer that could be good for competition, at least in the short term, but it's not clear that it will be better for us as users.

Hypothetically, why would some buyer using Chrome's monopoly to establish a market advantage in an adjacent domain be different than Google using Chrome's monopoly to establish a market advantage in an adjacent domain?

Re: DOJ will push Google to sell off Chrome

#800

Post by fsflover »

fransje26 wrote: post #683
jeswin wrote: post #329

I'm totally fine with this, but I wish they would do the same thing with Apple. Google's platform, at the very least is open and I can run my own apps. One could ask, "How is Apple a Monopoly, and do they abuse that position?". In my view it is, since you can't have a business or build connected hardware without an iOS app. And as for abusing that position for gaining market share, there are just too many examples st…

> One could ask, "How is Apple a Monopoly, and do they abuse that position?" I opened my local configurator to buy a 13" M3 MacBook Air. Memory, update from 16GB to 24GB -> +230€ SSD, update from 256GB to 2TB -> +920€ Textbook monopolistic price gouging.

Related discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42057758
Post reply on HN