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

Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 380 posts

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#41

Post by bpodgursky »

avs733 wrote: post #30
bitpush wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isnt that updated by some national database and google just pulls that data? Apparently Apple Maps will also get it in a few days, since they get the data from them as well.

I have been wondering this as well. I cannot imagine having this be autoupdated without review from a centralized database is a good idea. This is a process that needs to be frangible and have some friction in it. In this day and age, GPS mapping tools have major implications for societal function, safety, economics, national security, healthcare, etc. I'm struggling to think of an industry where a sudden absence/sub…

There are thousands of small street changes across the country each day. New subdivisions, road expansions, lane changes, new traffic lights. Of course the vast majority should be auto-updated without manual review, what would a person add to the process? The public database is the system of record in the first place.

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#43

Post by cj »

strictnein wrote: post #16
paulpauper wrote: post #13

what shocker . google has a long history of prevailing in court

The ACLU has a long history of prevailing in court, as does the NRA. Courts should regularly issue rulings you don't like. Their job isn't to make people happy.

"long history of prevailing in court" is another way of saying "Google isn't being punished as much as they deserve"

> Their job isn't to make people happy.

Sure, but I think we can all agree the US legal system very, very, very rarely issues any ruling that materially punishes a corporation. Even the worst of the worst typically get off very easy.

Do you disagree with that?

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#44

Post by strictnein »

bigyabai wrote: post #35
strictnein wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DOJ isn't part of the Judiciary branch, it's part of the Executive. > FAANG and the three-letter-agencies are one revolving door Most of the NSA is active duty service members and former military. Did you mean other three letter agencies, excluding the most powerful one dealing with surveillance? > Any judge that attempts to interfere with Google's data collection may well run afoul of the American surveillance s…

> The judge in this case put the final nail into Trumps slush fund. That's a very different, partisan effort. It's not bipartisan like the Patriot Act was, or domestic surveillance in-general. > Not everything is a conspiracy. You don't have some special insight into this. Not everything is as it seems. You can't meaningfully prove that the NSA sat on their hands in the 13 interceding years since Snowden. There's no…

> You can't meaningfully prove that the NSA sat on their hands in the 13 interceding years since Snowden.

I mean, you're correct? It's impossible to prove a negative.

> There's no evidence that US interventionism is on the straight-and-narrow now, you're wishcasting and calling it truth.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and all that. You're the ones making the extraordinary claims. The burden of proof is on you, not the people pointing out the flaws in these claims.

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#46

Post by mortoc »

strictnein wrote: post #40
shakna wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What ruling? It isn't released yet. We have declining to breakup, based on behavioral remedies, and zero details.

Kind of my point. How does one know something is a miscarriage of justice if you haven't read the ruling? Because you don't like the outcome?

I don't think it's a stretch to see a systemic pattern of big tech avoiding consequences that leave the rest of us in the power of monopolies.

Regardless of the content of this ruling, it's another brick in the wall.

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#47

Post by jonas21 »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #23
jvolkman wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. We had the same comments about Gulf of America. Edit: I don't know that there's an actual database served up by the US Gov, but governments control the naming of these things within their own jurisdictions. All of the big mapping products have the ability to serve up different names based on where you're viewing from. And Apple just renamed: https://apnews.com/article/apple-lake-ontario-america-google...

https://edits.nationalmap.gov/apps/gaz-domestic/public/searc... GNIS, Geographic Names Information System (Which still shows Lake Ontario for me as I write this. The body of water along the US's southern coast is Gulf of America however.)

The database entry was updated to "Lake America" on August 27:

https://edits.nationalmap.gov/apps/gaz-domestic/public/searc...

GNIS renders their own static map tiles, so it may take a while for the update to be reflected on the map itself.

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#48

Post by strictnein »

pixl97 wrote: post #36
strictnein wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DOJ isn't part of the Judiciary branch, it's part of the Executive. > FAANG and the three-letter-agencies are one revolving door Most of the NSA is active duty service members and former military. Did you mean other three letter agencies, excluding the most powerful one dealing with surveillance? > Any judge that attempts to interfere with Google's data collection may well run afoul of the American surveillance s…

[flagged]

This started under Biden? Crazy.

> These days all three branches march lock step in their jackboots

Which is why the Judicial branch has been ruling against the Executive branch again and again? I don't understand what evidence you think you have to the contrary, other than vibes?

Re: Google avoids a breakup of its ad tech business

#49

Post by vasco »

strictnein wrote: post #37
vasco wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since you are getting no replies but getting downvoted I'm adding source from 2016 corroborating what you mention: https://www.techtransparencyproject.org/articles/googles-rev... 251 individuals in such detected instances just in google. And that report is 10 years old, I'd bet it's 10x that by now.

That makes the argument worse, not better. Google employees tens of thousands of people. The US intelligence apparatus employees hundreds of thousands of people. In all of that, over eight years, there are 251 people who moved between the two, and because of that absolute rounding error, the entire federal government is beholden to them? Since you are making the accusation that this is a real conspiracy: statisticall…

What conspiracy mate? It's not so deep, I was curious if what he said was a lie due to the downvotes and found nice evidence for it. You don't find it convincing it's your choice, but the dude didn't pull it out of his ass.
Post reply on HN