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

How hucksters are manipulating Google to promote shady Chrome extensions

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 62 posts

Re: How hucksters are manipulating Google to promote shady Chrome extensions

#11

Post by prasadjoglekar »

grues-dinner wrote: post #5
Over2Chars wrote: post #3

These rogue extensions are "surreptitiously monetizing web searches" - but doesn't Google conspicuously monetize web searches? So it seems the Google TOS bans competition in search monetization using their "open source" browser. Isn't it odd that an "open source" browser is apparently designed to provide a monopoly on search monetization by the nice people who give it to you for free? And being 80% or so of all searc…

> Peter Thiel's claim that google is a search advertising monopoly masquerading as a (competitive, non-monopoly) technology company That's not a very deep insight, it's been pretty obvious since they bought out DoubleClick in 2007.

At this point in 2024/25, it's obvious to the point of multiple antitrust lawsuits against Google.

If you want a POV on the most recent one involving Doubleclick, listen to the first part of this podcast with Brian Kelley of App Nexus - a competitor to Google ad tech.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xm8gPuwqFHk

Re: How hucksters are manipulating Google to promote shady Chrome extensions

#12

Post by alephnerd »

Over2Chars wrote: post #10
grues-dinner wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Peter Thiel's claim that google is a search advertising monopoly masquerading as a (competitive, non-monopoly) technology company That's not a very deep insight, it's been pretty obvious since they bought out DoubleClick in 2007.

I agree, I think it's not a deep insight, but Thiel notes (in his 'zero to one' speech he gave) that Google actively pretends not to be a search advertising monopoly, and instead pretends to be a competitive technology company, in a wide range of technology fields, to "hide" their monopoly. Thiel is openly advocating monopolies, and says competition is for losers. I think he's just calling GOOG out for their marketin…

I'm not sure I buy Thiel's argument becuase plenty of their non-search businesses such as Google Cloud, GSuite, Waymo, and Verily have become pretty successful in their own right, and vertical integration is another form of monopoly that tends to cracked down on.

Re: How hucksters are manipulating Google to promote shady Chrome extensions

#13

Post by donatj »

I have two Chrome extensions in the store. They're not very popular and are really just features I wanted for my own use. I think I have less than 100 users total.

At least once a week I get emails from people

- offering money to add their "tracking" code

- wanting to purchased the extension outright

What they clearly want is access to my modest install base to push questionable code onto. I certainly am not going for these offers, but I could certainly see someone less financially secure giving in to it, and that scares me a little.

The idea of paid malware insertion in smaller packages is kind of troubling in general. How often just in life in general do we just trust opaque binaries to be clean.

Re: How hucksters are manipulating Google to promote shady Chrome extensions

#14

Post by dartos »

grues-dinner wrote: post #5
Over2Chars wrote: post #3

These rogue extensions are "surreptitiously monetizing web searches" - but doesn't Google conspicuously monetize web searches? So it seems the Google TOS bans competition in search monetization using their "open source" browser. Isn't it odd that an "open source" browser is apparently designed to provide a monopoly on search monetization by the nice people who give it to you for free? And being 80% or so of all searc…

> Peter Thiel's claim that google is a search advertising monopoly masquerading as a (competitive, non-monopoly) technology company That's not a very deep insight, it's been pretty obvious since they bought out DoubleClick in 2007.

I mean… they’re as much search as Amazon is retail, no?

Doesn’t GCP bring in big bucks?

Not to mention gsuite. If your company don’t use Microsoft office they use gsuite.

Re: How hucksters are manipulating Google to promote shady Chrome extensions

#15

Post by Over2Chars »

dartos wrote: post #14
grues-dinner wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Peter Thiel's claim that google is a search advertising monopoly masquerading as a (competitive, non-monopoly) technology company That's not a very deep insight, it's been pretty obvious since they bought out DoubleClick in 2007.

I mean… they’re as much search as Amazon is retail, no? Doesn’t GCP bring in big bucks? Not to mention gsuite. If your company don’t use Microsoft office they use gsuite.

The big blue block is search advertising revenue:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093781/distribution-of-...

the much smaller black box is GCP. Much smaller. much much smaller.

Re: How hucksters are manipulating Google to promote shady Chrome extensions

#16

Post by Over2Chars »

alephnerd wrote: post #12
Over2Chars wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, I think it's not a deep insight, but Thiel notes (in his 'zero to one' speech he gave) that Google actively pretends not to be a search advertising monopoly, and instead pretends to be a competitive technology company, in a wide range of technology fields, to "hide" their monopoly. Thiel is openly advocating monopolies, and says competition is for losers. I think he's just calling GOOG out for their marketin…

I'm not sure I buy Thiel's argument becuase plenty of their non-search businesses such as Google Cloud, GSuite, Waymo, and Verily have become pretty successful in their own right, and vertical integration is another form of monopoly that tends to cracked down on.

Check out the big blue box. I think Thiel's point is spot on:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1093781/distribution-of-...

Re: How hucksters are manipulating Google to promote shady Chrome extensions

#17

Post by whatshisface »

alephnerd wrote: post #12
Over2Chars wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, I think it's not a deep insight, but Thiel notes (in his 'zero to one' speech he gave) that Google actively pretends not to be a search advertising monopoly, and instead pretends to be a competitive technology company, in a wide range of technology fields, to "hide" their monopoly. Thiel is openly advocating monopolies, and says competition is for losers. I think he's just calling GOOG out for their marketin…

I'm not sure I buy Thiel's argument becuase plenty of their non-search businesses such as Google Cloud, GSuite, Waymo, and Verily have become pretty successful in their own right, and vertical integration is another form of monopoly that tends to cracked down on.

If I had a monopoly on sugar and traded in silver and healthcare, I would still have a monopoly on sugar.

Re: How hucksters are manipulating Google to promote shady Chrome extensions

#18

Post by luckylion »

donatj wrote: post #13

I have two Chrome extensions in the store. They're not very popular and are really just features I wanted for my own use. I think I have less than 100 users total. At least once a week I get emails from people - offering money to add their "tracking" code - wanting to purchased the extension outright What they clearly want is access to my modest install base to push questionable code onto. I certainly am not going fo…

Did they seem personalized or do they just mass-mail every developer they can find? 100 users seem very little to go through the trouble of acquiring an extension and then push bad code.

Did they ever give you an idea of what they are ready to pay?

Re: How hucksters are manipulating Google to promote shady Chrome extensions

#19

Post by [deleted] »

luckylion wrote: post #18
donatj wrote: post #13

I have two Chrome extensions in the store. They're not very popular and are really just features I wanted for my own use. I think I have less than 100 users total. At least once a week I get emails from people - offering money to add their "tracking" code - wanting to purchased the extension outright What they clearly want is access to my modest install base to push questionable code onto. I certainly am not going fo…

Did they seem personalized or do they just mass-mail every developer they can find? 100 users seem very little to go through the trouble of acquiring an extension and then push bad code. Did they ever give you an idea of what they are ready to pay?

[deleted]

Re: How hucksters are manipulating Google to promote shady Chrome extensions

#20

Post by surajrmal »

HeatrayEnjoyer wrote: post #4
Over2Chars wrote: post #3

These rogue extensions are "surreptitiously monetizing web searches" - but doesn't Google conspicuously monetize web searches? So it seems the Google TOS bans competition in search monetization using their "open source" browser. Isn't it odd that an "open source" browser is apparently designed to provide a monopoly on search monetization by the nice people who give it to you for free? And being 80% or so of all searc…

Small info piece: Chrome isn't open source. Otherwise I agree (even if it means agreeing with Peter Thiel in this case).

99% of its source is open. I wonder what you think of open source applications that make API calls into closed source cloud systems?
Post reply on HN