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

An update on Google's compliance with the DMA

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 54 posts

Re: An update on Google's compliance with the DMA

#21

Post by krono »

whatio wrote: post #6
rwmj wrote: post #2

I don't think I've ever read a company whinging so much about having to obey the law. Comes across like a petulant child.

A petulant child does not explain the negative consequences of what he is being asked to do using metrics and specific stakeholder feedback. It does not help consumers to have outside parties run roughshod over businesses. Regulations are necessary, but to be effective, they must be measured, in both senses of the word. To be implemented carefully, they must be subject to criticism, even by the party being regulated.…

I think it's highly disingenuous of you to claim that the regulators in question are acting without any plan or purpose even if those might not be immediately clear. "If you don't like how the table is set, turn over the table."

Re: An update on Google's compliance with the DMA

#22

Post by pyrale »

whatio wrote: post #6
rwmj wrote: post #2

I don't think I've ever read a company whinging so much about having to obey the law. Comes across like a petulant child.

A petulant child does not explain the negative consequences of what he is being asked to do using metrics and specific stakeholder feedback. It does not help consumers to have outside parties run roughshod over businesses. Regulations are necessary, but to be effective, they must be measured, in both senses of the word. To be implemented carefully, they must be subject to criticism, even by the party being regulated.…

> but to be effective, they must be measured

Google can't really be trusted to provide measurements proving that they should be regulated, though.

If they want the problem to be fairly studied, they're free to publish their datasets.

Re: An update on Google's compliance with the DMA

#23

Post by therealmarv »

Too late too slow. Google in European Union feels already today like a different website in comparison to Google USA where there is an AI answering (which is totally not enabled in Europe).

Meanwhile the crowds slowly adopting asking ChatGPT & Co about hotel recommendations and ChatGPT delivers.

And in Europe I need to open maps.google.com to search for places because a direct link from google.com is not allowed. It's a joke...

Europe has good intentions but the execution makes it fall behind... and they will realise when it's too late.

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Re: An update on Google's compliance with the DMA

#25

Post by Suppafly »

jjulius wrote: post #17
walkingthisquai wrote: post #15

I know everyone loves hating on Google here, but some of the changes that they were required to make are genuinely quite annoying. Maps results on the search page don't work like they used to. Clicking the mini-map doesn't open to Google Maps anymore, so you have to relearn some behaviours. I know it's minor stuff (for now), but as a long time happy user of Maps, this kind of thing does not benefit me, and I don't ge…

1.) Click the mini map when the result comes up. 2.) Click the button in the bottom right of the mini map that says, "Open in Maps". Voila! Literally just one extra click or tap - what's the issue? Is a single extra tap really "genuinely quite annoying"?

>2.) Click the button in the bottom right of the mini map that says, "Open in Maps".

A lot of times actions like this are a lot harder on mobile devices even when they seem easy on larger screen. I know whenever I hit back on a youtube video or a google maps navigation and it turns into a little stamp instead of actually going back, it pisses me off because then I have try and hit a little X on the stamp sized video just to do what I wanted in the first place, which was 'go back to the previous app I was using'.

Re: An update on Google's compliance with the DMA

#26

Post by summerlight »

jjulius wrote: post #17
walkingthisquai wrote: post #15

I know everyone loves hating on Google here, but some of the changes that they were required to make are genuinely quite annoying. Maps results on the search page don't work like they used to. Clicking the mini-map doesn't open to Google Maps anymore, so you have to relearn some behaviours. I know it's minor stuff (for now), but as a long time happy user of Maps, this kind of thing does not benefit me, and I don't ge…

1.) Click the mini map when the result comes up. 2.) Click the button in the bottom right of the mini map that says, "Open in Maps". Voila! Literally just one extra click or tap - what's the issue? Is a single extra tap really "genuinely quite annoying"?

In many cases, a single extra action is known to cause pretty steep drop in discovery/engagement rates and it's the whole point of "default option" antitrust debates.

Re: An update on Google's compliance with the DMA

#27

Post by poizan42 »

walkingthisquai wrote: post #15

I know everyone loves hating on Google here, but some of the changes that they were required to make are genuinely quite annoying. Maps results on the search page don't work like they used to. Clicking the mini-map doesn't open to Google Maps anymore, so you have to relearn some behaviours. I know it's minor stuff (for now), but as a long time happy user of Maps, this kind of thing does not benefit me, and I don't ge…

That is Google's choice. They weren't allowed to give Google Maps as the only option. Rather than implementing a way for the user to choose which site to use for maps they decided they would rather remove the feature altogether.

Re: An update on Google's compliance with the DMA

#28

Post by ab_testing »

rwmj wrote: post #2

I don't think I've ever read a company whinging so much about having to obey the law. Comes across like a petulant child.

I don’t think no they are whining about obeying the law. In fact they are saying that with this reduced data that they are showing on the front search page, comparison sites are wining and direct to consumer airlines sites are losing. This would be fine for bigger airlines as they can still buy ads at the top of the page but not for the smaller airlines as they sometimes benefitted from the direct links that Google provided to those niche airline sites . In the end , the winner is going to be the one with the bigger pockets and not necessarily the best flights .

Re: An update on Google's compliance with the DMA

#29

Post by jjulius »

summerlight wrote: post #26
jjulius wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1.) Click the mini map when the result comes up. 2.) Click the button in the bottom right of the mini map that says, "Open in Maps". Voila! Literally just one extra click or tap - what's the issue? Is a single extra tap really "genuinely quite annoying"?

In many cases, a single extra action is known to cause pretty steep drop in discovery/engagement rates and it's the whole point of "default option" antitrust debates.

If the user is determined, they'll press on and discover it, as I and others have. If they're not, then they won't. Perhaps a drop in discovery/engagement suggests that using that feature wasn't as vital as others thought it was?

Re: An update on Google's compliance with the DMA

#30

Post by Suppafly »

bbqfog wrote: post #7
bjt wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sincerely asking... help me connect the dots there? Suppose Google is broken up into separate businesses, one for search and one for ads. Is the idea that the search side would have no incentive to show hotel search results on a map? I'm not seeing the connection between the breakup proposal and the features discussed in the post.

No the idea would be that the search would lose its ability to be a monopoly because Chrome + Search + Maps + Android... would stop artificially propping it up in the market. There would be many search engines and the ability for one to drastically impact other industries with UI changes would go away.

>There would be many search engines and the ability for one to drastically impact other industries with UI changes would go away.

Honestly that's just wishful thinking. Generally these monopolies, regardless of 'artificial propping up' tend to be fairly natural monopolies and these sorts of changes just make it harder on people to get the experience they had before and prefer.

Post reply on HN