Live data from Hacker News

DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

storage.courtlistener.com

81–90 of 129 posts

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#81
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome currently has far more paid full time engineers than the linux kernel does. I struggle to see how they get paid - except again, by charging search engines to be the default browser or something.

Chrome does a lot of things. I know there are downsides and many people don't agree, but I think overall the browser/internet experience would benefit from simpler browsers that don't move so fast.

> I think overall the browser/internet experience would benefit from simpler browsers that don't move so fast.

I wish browsers moved faster so that I don't have to download so many native apps. Native mobile apps are monitoring me continuously, and way more opaquely than web apps. More importantly, they can't be thwarted by plugins. As a mobile Firefox and Desktop Chrome user, I wish browsers (especially FF) moved faster.

So, no - for privacy reasons I don't agree with your view.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#82
post #27
post #3

This will quietly die off after Jan 20. Nothing to see here.

Yep. Even if there were a case, it would be litigated in the courts for years.

The case is over. Are you even paying attention? They were found guilty. This is "sentencing" basically, the penalty phase.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#83
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome currently has far more paid full time engineers than the linux kernel does. I struggle to see how they get paid - except again, by charging search engines to be the default browser or something.

Chrome does a lot of things. I know there are downsides and many people don't agree, but I think overall the browser/internet experience would benefit from simpler browsers that don't move so fast.

Simpler browsers sound not good to me. It's a bit of a rallying cry on HN it feels like, often in sharper terms.

But computing is so intermediated. There's so many checks to do anything on an iPhone that isn't in the dead code your phone already runs. An Oculus has cool experiences, but we can't shape and share our own easily. There's always someone else's data center between you and your device today.

The web is largely still an experience of data centers too. But it's a neutral platform. Where we can go to any data-center we please. Where anyone can tap the amazing web platform & it's amazing APIs to build all kinds of cool experiences.

In a world where tech defines what the user wants for them, I feel so much like the web & every web platform API is stealing just a little more fire from the gods. It's promethean, giving to humanity prowess & capabilities we wouldn't otherwise have.

The pace is confusing. Sometimes things happen fast. Often they are left sort of unfinished. Fast & slow, fast & slow. I'd love if there was a huge source of funding the societies of the world were putting up to help make this critical human capability, to to fund long careful slow healing and helping as well as fancy new features (es2015/esm modules in the browser tool sooo long & still has so much to fix for example). These things are hard, complicated, and we try so hard to keep going forward without causing too much unfixable undislodgesble bad. But this spirit of bravery is necessary, to keep going. Simpler isn't good. The versatility of the web is too important. There's no other viable substitutes for the capabilities being available on the web, no other paths we have to stealing fire from the gods, no other Promethean dreams. This platform is it, and we need the persistence & drive as a society to keep ourselves improving our shared interactive media form, to keep from being swallowed by the darkness that most computing brings in.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#84
post #20

Google's response: "DOJ’s staggering proposal would hurt consumers and America’s global technological leadership" https://blog.google/outreach-initiatives/public-policy/doj-s...

I wholeheartedly agree. What the hell is the DOJ thinking?

Would've been believable before the MV3 adblock ban fiasco. Now it's clear this browser doesn't care about the users.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#85
post #17

This has already been discussed extensively in prior threads, but the biggest question is, how does a spun-off Chrome get funded? Chrome/Firefox/Safari all cost hundreds of millions of dollars a year to maintain. Currently, Safari and Firefox both make essentially all their revenue through default search agreements. Chrome, Edge, and now Brave are produced by companies that also own the search engines, so they're ess…

Advertising deal with google/others to pay for full time staff along with volunteers?

And the underlying chromium will be maintained by all the browser companies that are using it

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#86
post #57
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this mean he wouldn't have run this time if it weren't for his legal troubles?

I can't say for certain, I'm Australian and don't work with the US political admin (ie no inside line) but there's certainly been US insiders that have strongly hinted dodging massive mounting legal trouble was a major motivation for Trump to run again. To be clear they may have been deadly serious, seriously joking, or both at the same time .. it's just that good a fit as a theory.

The Machiavellian move by Biden would have been a pardon conditioned on retiring from public service.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#87
post #20

Google's response: "DOJ’s staggering proposal would hurt consumers and America’s global technological leadership" https://blog.google/outreach-initiatives/public-policy/doj-s...

I wholeheartedly agree. What the hell is the DOJ thinking?

I agree. The DOJ should stick to imposing fines or enforcing rules on things like bundling or pricing. Not arbitrarily breaking companies up where there's no clear business model.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#88
post #13
post #10

As usual DOJ is late to the party. Google is already facing competition and as it falters, the doj will use this as 'evidence' it was effective.

The way you write this implies that it is somehow an intrinsic fault of the DoJ and not the fault of monopolists like Google with the massive resources to slow walk these kinds of things, or the effective lobbying of the Obama administration followed by four chaotic years of Trump. Never forget that corruption is always to blame for these failures, not the noble people who try and fix these things with flawed institu…

It's fair to criticize the DoJ if they're enforcing anti-trust laws in a poor manner.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#89

The solution should just be to force browsers to support profile migration from one browser to another. And generally, they should just pass laws that enforce interoperability in the software world, from OS to social networks, users should always be allowed to easily migrate.

Totally agree.

The government has so many tools for enforcement it's puzzling why they insist on arbitrarily breaking up and creating new companies as if they're capable of determining what business models will work or not.

Re: DOJ filed paperwork to US District Court to force Google to spin off Chrome [pdf]

#90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome does a lot of things. I know there are downsides and many people don't agree, but I think overall the browser/internet experience would benefit from simpler browsers that don't move so fast.

IMO, Chrome does not move fast enough . The fact of the matter is that the web has been dying because people have moved to mobile devices, where they prefer native apps. If you're advocating for slower development of browsers, you're also advocating for the death of the open web.

I, for one, do not prefer native mobile apps, I'd be happy to use web, but companies actively degrade my experience there, and shove their apps in my face because this way they can track me and serve ads.
Post reply on HN