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

Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

plus.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 77 posts

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#11

Post by rbarooah »

tferris wrote: post #7
rbarooah wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of what has put Google in their position as the gatekeeper is that the perception of being balanced and neutral. If search was more overtly biased, Bing would step in as the neutral player. The more they consolidate their power, the less they seem constrained by this. I don't see anything that fundamentally distinguishes google from these other companies other than their present strategic position.

Sorry, I don't get your point. You can be successful with your product on the WWW without employing any Google services, being totally independent. If people and other sites like you and link back to you your traffic will quickly skyrocket —which feels natural. You are not obliged to use any Google service like GA. Just use the Internet and its open standards and you are ready to go because Google left the Internet's…

I agree that you don't get my point.

The reason Google hasn't built a walled garden around the internet because they simply don't yet have the power to do that.

You talk as if it was something they could easily have done but have chosen not to. I disagree. They just aren't in a position to do it.

It makes no sense at all to say that innovation on the web has vanished because of the Appstore. We are in in a boom time for internet startups, and we have healthy browser competition leading to web standards advancing much faster than at any time in the past.

There is room for both the open web, and for more controlled environments like the app store or Facebook to coexist and compete with one another. Each offers different tradeoffs.

The existence of different kinds of environment is a good thing. It provides a variety of different economic opportunities, and choices for consumers.

Google would naturally like to have more influence and control, but the reality is that they exist in a competitive environment.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#12

Post by sparknlaunch12 »

gaius wrote: post #10
sparknlaunch12 wrote: post #8

Pretty scary some of the proposed legislation being thrown around in the UK. On large companies... If individuals have issues with large companies they can simply go to an alternative. However government should intervene to ensure "internet" companies comply with the same laws as "non internet".

Google's elaborate tax-avoidance schemes mean they forfeit the right to an opinion on what the UK government does.

Avoidance or evasion?

If a company is compliant then it is up to government to intervene and change laws. However law change should apply to all entities, on or off line.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#13

Post by jessriedel »

gaius wrote: post #10
sparknlaunch12 wrote: post #8

Pretty scary some of the proposed legislation being thrown around in the UK. On large companies... If individuals have issues with large companies they can simply go to an alternative. However government should intervene to ensure "internet" companies comply with the same laws as "non internet".

Google's elaborate tax-avoidance schemes mean they forfeit the right to an opinion on what the UK government does.

If I maintain a free, US-based, ad-supported website which caters to Iranians (and so pay no Iranian taxes), do I forfeit the right to an opinion on filtering by the Iranian government?

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#14

Post by [deleted] »

rbarooah wrote: post #11
tferris wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I don't get your point. You can be successful with your product on the WWW without employing any Google services, being totally independent. If people and other sites like you and link back to you your traffic will quickly skyrocket —which feels natural. You are not obliged to use any Google service like GA. Just use the Internet and its open standards and you are ready to go because Google left the Internet's…

I agree that you don't get my point. The reason Google hasn't built a walled garden around the internet because they simply don't yet have the power to do that. You talk as if it was something they could easily have done but have chosen not to. I disagree. They just aren't in a position to do it. It makes no sense at all to say that innovation on the web has vanished because of the Appstore. We are in in a boom time…

[deleted]

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#15

Post by jessriedel »

sparknlaunch12 wrote: post #12
gaius wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google's elaborate tax-avoidance schemes mean they forfeit the right to an opinion on what the UK government does.

Avoidance or evasion? If a company is compliant then it is up to government to intervene and change laws. However law change should apply to all entities, on or off line.

Actually, "Tax evasion" generally denotes something illegal. "Avoidance" is the correct term here.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#16

Post by gaius »

sparknlaunch12 wrote: post #12
gaius wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google's elaborate tax-avoidance schemes mean they forfeit the right to an opinion on what the UK government does.

Avoidance or evasion? If a company is compliant then it is up to government to intervene and change laws. However law change should apply to all entities, on or off line.

Indeed. But Eric Schmidt doesn't get to whine about e.g. education in the UK, without ponying up the cash.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#17

Post by jkn »

rbarooah wrote: post #5
tferris wrote: post #3

Imagine Apple, Facebook or whoever controlled the Internet like Google does: How long would it take until they abused their power? If someone is dominating the web it's Google and looking at their power and how much traffic they move—their actions feel balanced and neutral compared to any other player.

Part of what has put Google in their position as the gatekeeper is that the perception of being balanced and neutral. If search was more overtly biased, Bing would step in as the neutral player. The more they consolidate their power, the less they seem constrained by this. I don't see anything that fundamentally distinguishes google from these other companies other than their present strategic position.

I don't see anything that fundamentally distinguishes google from these other companies other than their present strategic position.

There is I think a difference in company culture. Sure, it is not something you can measure like market capitalization or dividends, but that doesn't make it insignificant.

It is common for people to say that all big companies are equivalent in that they just look for the best strategy to maximize shareholder value, which they have to do by law. I don't think that's the complete picture: there are humans behind every company, behind every decision they make. If Larry Page and Sergey Brin believe in an open Internet, that will strongly influence what strategy among many they choose to maximize shareholder value. Well, as long as they have a controlling stake, which might be for a long time seeing the recently announced stock split.

But it's not only board members who determine how open a company is. For example, developers have their say in what technology or protocol will be used for a particular project. What they propose might depend on their personal views, and what passes as a valid argument (e.g. openness or standard compliance) depends on company culture. Personal views and company culture obviously depend on who gets hired, and that's a matter where anyone (developer, HR, etc.) might have a say. If Google employees have a bias towards hiring people who embrace open technologies, that will have an effect. And if Google's image tends to attract job applications from people who believe in an open Internet, that will also have an effect. This culture thing is probably more stable than a strategic position.

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#18

Post by mjwalshe »

sparknlaunch12 wrote: post #8

Pretty scary some of the proposed legislation being thrown around in the UK. On large companies... If individuals have issues with large companies they can simply go to an alternative. However government should intervene to ensure "internet" companies comply with the same laws as "non internet".

Which is part of what the proposed laws are ie extending the traffic analysis they can already do on phonecalls to the internet (ok they are asking for a lot more but that may be a negotiating ploy)

Though after the scandel with the Met and News International maybe it RIPA sould be amended so that the Police dont have access without a warrent and leave just the SS and SIS.

Oh and remove any ability of local govenment from RIPA

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#19

Post by Sargis »

rbarooah wrote: post #11
tferris wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I don't get your point. You can be successful with your product on the WWW without employing any Google services, being totally independent. If people and other sites like you and link back to you your traffic will quickly skyrocket —which feels natural. You are not obliged to use any Google service like GA. Just use the Internet and its open standards and you are ready to go because Google left the Internet's…

I agree that you don't get my point. The reason Google hasn't built a walled garden around the internet because they simply don't yet have the power to do that. You talk as if it was something they could easily have done but have chosen not to. I disagree. They just aren't in a position to do it. It makes no sense at all to say that innovation on the web has vanished because of the Appstore. We are in in a boom time…

Google's mission is to display their ads to as many people as possible. How is a walled garden going to help achieve that goal?

Re: Sergey Brin's Clarification On Guardian article

#20

Post by Tloewald »

tferris wrote: post #7
rbarooah wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of what has put Google in their position as the gatekeeper is that the perception of being balanced and neutral. If search was more overtly biased, Bing would step in as the neutral player. The more they consolidate their power, the less they seem constrained by this. I don't see anything that fundamentally distinguishes google from these other companies other than their present strategic position.

Sorry, I don't get your point. You can be successful with your product on the WWW without employing any Google services, being totally independent. If people and other sites like you and link back to you your traffic will quickly skyrocket —which feels natural. You are not obliged to use any Google service like GA. Just use the Internet and its open standards and you are ready to go because Google left the Internet's…

Google have entered the Chinese market, compromised their values and still got their asses handed to them by Baidu, then pulled out. Not quite the same thing.
Post reply on HN