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

EU Fines Google $1.02B for Favoring Its Own Services

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 143 posts

Re: EU Fines Google $1.02B for Favoring Its Own Services

#71

Post by stymaar »

esterna wrote: post #37
phiresky wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU told them they can not by default prefer their own maps product when linking from their search product, they have to allow the user to choose. They could have simply added a selector when a user first clicks on the maps preview in the search result, and then remembered it on device or across that user's account. But of course, then the user could choose a competitor's product and Google would have to honor it.…

I wonder if the EU will someday figure out a patch for this "Deteriorate everyone's user experience in a way that is technically compliant and blame the EU" behavioural exploit...

The European Commission is way too pro-business for that, even when the said businesses are parasitic actors who don't even pay taxes in the EU.

Re: EU Fines Google $1.02B for Favoring Its Own Services

#72

Post by mrtksn »

nolok wrote: post #69
mrtksn wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On mobile its navigation is terrible, takes you into strange routes that might be technically faster but are hard to drive at or sometimes non-existent. Sometimes tries to be smart, makes everything worse. i.e. suggest a route that it says its 5 min faster and shows no traffic and you find out that there's no traffic because of a road closure further ahead. The UI when driving is not as good as the competition. I onl…

It was a not specified but clearly meant part of his question that it's asking in the context of "... that could be tied to decoupling". Eg this has nothing to do and thus can't be hand-wavy blamed on for things like "On mobile its navigation is terrible, takes you into strange routes that might be technically faster but are hard to drive at or sometimes non-existent. Sometimes tries to be smart, makes everything wor…

It's the same thing with Internet Explorer, they can get away with low quality and orders of magnitude prices increases and restrictions on the API because they can and they can because of the monopoly. Early decoupling could have allowed competition which might have had good data, more open or more fairly priced api, better UI and navigation since it could have made commercial sense to invest in these things.

Re: EU Fines Google $1.02B for Favoring Its Own Services

#73

Post by rsynnott »

aabhay wrote: post #62
vrganj wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, US tech services can either follow our laws our they can get the fuck out of our market. The way people treat them breaking our laws as their god given right and then frame our fine as anything but their own fault is starting to really annoy me. Respect our sovereignty, follow our laws. Or don't, but then don't be surprised that breaking the law is punished. Maybe things are different in the US, maybe corporate…

While there is “law”, how much agency does an average European individual have in shaping those laws? This is a multi national body for which you can’t vote for its leader. You can’t vote on any of its resolutions or referendums.

It’s representative democracy, like most democracies. It is, granted, a particularly complex and confusing one.

In practice, the average European has more agency in shaping EU law than the average American does in shaping US law; the US’s electoral system means that, realistically, on a federal level, most peoples’ votes simply do not matter (two party FPTP system, with most seats being safe). The EU parliament is at least multiparty proportional representation, and most member states’ governments are also elected via some sort of PR.

> for which you can’t vote for its leader

Most democracies don’t have a directly elected head of state; it’s _largely_ a thing in the Americas and Africa. In terms of big countries with a true presidential system, you’re really talking the US, Russia, Brazil, Nigeria and Indonesia. I’m, ah, not sure that we should be rushing to emulate those paragons of democracy :)

Re: EU Fines Google $1.02B for Favoring Its Own Services

#74

Post by maccard »

nolok wrote: post #61
maccard wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well no, the cookie banner is a well intentioned but flawed and poorly designed law. Any law that is that technically specific but relies on people without an understanding of how it works is doomed to repeat the same fate. The eu should have seen prop 65 and not sleepwalked back into it.

1. The EU works on intent of the law rather than specific wording and precedence. 2. The law is a very simple "if you want to do it, you have to make sure they know", intended to force information without creating excessive administrative / legal / tech burden, please inform me about what other way you would present it that would reach the goal without being subject to malicious compliance ?

I understand. I'm generally a proponent of the spirit of the law rather than the wording of the law, and I've argued that is how the EU works here in the past. I think GDPR is a much, much better attempt at solving the problem, and has made meaningful change in tech industries. The ePrivacy directive just added pseudo-mandatory popups to every company without a technical lawyer.

Re: EU Fines Google $1.02B for Favoring Its Own Services

#75

Post by vrganj »

rsynnott wrote: post #73
aabhay wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While there is “law”, how much agency does an average European individual have in shaping those laws? This is a multi national body for which you can’t vote for its leader. You can’t vote on any of its resolutions or referendums.

It’s representative democracy, like most democracies. It is, granted, a particularly complex and confusing one. In practice, the average European has more agency in shaping EU law than the average American does in shaping US law; the US’s electoral system means that, realistically, on a federal level, most peoples’ votes simply do not matter (two party FPTP system, with most seats being safe). The EU parliament is at…

The US doesn't have a directly elected head of state either. The demos elects the electoral college, which elects the head of state. Twice in recent memory directly against the popular vote, most recently Trump I.

Re: EU Fines Google $1.02B for Favoring Its Own Services

#76

Post by kotaKat »

qq66 wrote: post #5

The EU has found a clever way to charge US tech companies for market access without triggering a WTO violation.

This time the American tech industry is the uncolonized native America, and the Europeans are the settlers that ran out of land to take over and decided they must forcefully re-colonize Americans and our design decisions and way of life by force.

Re: EU Fines Google $1.02B for Favoring Its Own Services

#77

Post by BrenBarn »

nolok wrote: post #53
esterna wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if the EU will someday figure out a patch for this "Deteriorate everyone's user experience in a way that is technically compliant and blame the EU" behavioural exploit...

It's fine + obligation to fix, and daily fine until fixed, and higher fine if you do it again. I know that sounds like it comes from "it will never work", but that's how active directory, office file format, etc ... got opened, and in a case more similar to here that's how windows n and decoupling of media and internet component from windows internals happened. The issue is, yes, it takes time. Another issue, purely…

> It's fine + obligation to fix, and daily fine until fixed, and higher fine if you do it again.

The important proviso is that the penalties need to (on some non-geological timescale) get high enough that the offender is no longer capable of operating. That could mean the fines reach $500 billion, or it could mean the company is barred from operating in the EU, or it could mean people get arrested and assets are seized. But unless the penalties become crippling, it won't matter. It needs to reach a point where the downsides of noncompliance are actually greater than the benefits.

Re: EU Fines Google $1.02B for Favoring Its Own Services

#78

Post by spwa4 »

stymaar wrote: post #71
esterna wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if the EU will someday figure out a patch for this "Deteriorate everyone's user experience in a way that is technically compliant and blame the EU" behavioural exploit...

The European Commission is way too pro-business for that, even when the said businesses are parasitic actors who don't even pay taxes in the EU.

Plus that just isn't how governments work. Governments work by imposing costs on others. They do not build.

Re: EU Fines Google $1.02B for Favoring Its Own Services

#79

Post by whateverboat »

plantain wrote: post #10

It drives me insane when in Europe the link between Google Search and Google Maps is broken and I often have to copy paste an address between the two. Thanks EU, what if I like Google's integrations?

Google can give you an option to set in your settings which maps can be linked directly, and they can provide an API for map providers.

Re: EU Fines Google $1.02B for Favoring Its Own Services

#80

Post by brainwad »

amelius wrote: post #42
qq66 wrote: post #5

The EU has found a clever way to charge US tech companies for market access without triggering a WTO violation.

This is only true if Google isn't ordered to change its behavior and the fine isn't higher next time.

The EU just finds a new thing to fine each time. Since the scope of US consumer internet companies is so vast, they can mine €1b fines more or less limitlessly.
Post reply on HN