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

Google can keep its Chrome browser but will be barred from exclusive contracts

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 663 posts

Re: Google can keep its Chrome browser but will be barred from exclusive contracts

#101

Post by matt3D »

supernova87a wrote: post #56

By the way, a pet peeve of mine right now is that reporters covering court cases (and we have so many of public interest lately) never seem to simply paste the link to the online PDF decision/ruling for us all to read, right in the story. (and another user here kindly did that for us below: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.223... ) It seems such a simple step (they must have been using the rul…

They don't necessarily want to be the gatekeepers of information, they just want your next click to be another news story on their website.

External links are bad for user retention/addiction.

This also has a side effect of back linking no longer being a measure of a 'good' website, so good quality content from inconsistently trafficked sites gets buried on search results.

Re: Google can keep its Chrome browser but will be barred from exclusive contracts

#102

Post by solardev »

majewsky wrote: post #66
solardev wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ideally Mozilla would go bankrupt and a better-managed org could fork Firefox and pick up from there.

If forking Firefox was a viable route, would someone not already have done it?

There's not really a strong incentive to while Mozilla is still around (and despite that, there are still a few forks... Waterfox, for example). I think it would take a collapse of Mozilla, Oracle-style, to really spur that.

(edit: Oracle didn't collapse, I mean what happened to OpenOffice.org.)

Re: Google can keep its Chrome browser but will be barred from exclusive contracts

#103

Post by anthem2025 »

solardev wrote: post #32
stackskipton wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feels like judge was looking for any excuse not to apply harsh penalty and since Google brought up AI as competitor, the judge accepted it as acceptable excuse for very minor penalty.

[flagged]

According to scotus they can just give the judge a thank you gift for doing such a good job.

Re: Google can keep its Chrome browser but will be barred from exclusive contracts

#104

Post by Workaccount2 »

supernova87a wrote: post #56

By the way, a pet peeve of mine right now is that reporters covering court cases (and we have so many of public interest lately) never seem to simply paste the link to the online PDF decision/ruling for us all to read, right in the story. (and another user here kindly did that for us below: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.223... ) It seems such a simple step (they must have been using the rul…

Never link outside your domain has been rule #1 of the ad-driven business for years now.

Once users leave your page, they become exponentially less likely to load more ad-ridden pages from your website.

Ironically this is also why there is so much existential fear about AI in the media. LLMs will do to them what they do to primary sources (and more likely just cut them out of the loop). This Google story will get a lot of clicks. But it is easy to see a near future where an AI agent just retrieves and summarizes the case for you. And does a much better job too.

Re: Google can keep its Chrome browser but will be barred from exclusive contracts

#105

Post by whycome »

bediger4000 wrote: post #49
jonas21 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you not see ChatGPT and Claude as viable alternatives to search? They've certainly replaced a fair chunk of my queries.

I do not. I prefer to read the primary sources, LLM summaries are, after all, probabilistic, and based on syntax. I'm often looking for semantics, and an LLM really really is not going to give me that.

Since when does google give your primary sources for simple queries? You have to wade through all the garbage. At least an LLM will give you the general path and provide sources.

Re: Google can keep its Chrome browser but will be barred from exclusive contracts

#106

Post by andrewstuart »

This is great news.

Chrome is the most sophisticated and awesome software ever built, next to Linux. It leads and drives web innovation.

Don’t get me wrong - my main drive is Firefox but googles investment in Chrome benefits every single player in the internet.

Re: Google can keep its Chrome browser but will be barred from exclusive contracts

#107

Post by ankit219 »

Re Chrome divesture:

> The remedy also extends beyond the conduct Plaintiffs seek to redress. It was Google’s control of the Chrome default, not its ownership of Chrome as a whole, that the court highlighted in its liability finding. See Google, 747 F. Supp. 3d at 120–21. Ordering Google to sell one of its most popular products, one that it has built “from the ground up” and in which it has invested (and continues to invest) billions of dollars, in the hope of opening a single channel of distribution to competition—and not even one that was unlawfully foreclosed by the challenged contracts—cannot reasonably be described as a remedy “tailored to fit the wrong creating the occasion for the remedy.” Microsoft III, 253 F.3d at 107; Rem. Tr. at 2466:23–2468:3 (Pichai); id. at 1634:23–1636:2 (Tabriz) (discussing PXR0215 at -257). Further, as a legal matter, the divestiture of Chrome exceeds the proper scope of relief. “All parties agree that the relevant geographic marketis the United States.” Google, 747 F. Supp. 3d at 107. Chrome, however, is not so geographically confined. The vast majority—over 80%—of its monthly active users are located outside the United States. Rem. Tr. at 1619:23–1620:6 (Tabriz). Plaintiffs do not try to make the case that a divestiture of Chrome to just U.S.-based users is feasible.

Re: Google can keep its Chrome browser but will be barred from exclusive contracts

#108

Post by anthem2025 »

skybrian wrote: post #58
bergfest wrote: post #34

They should be barred from shipping experimental or non-standardized features in Chrome to prevent them from abusing their monopoly and forcing others hands by creating de-facto standards without a fair discourse. Experimental features should be allowed in special Chrome builds targeted at developers only, and not be allowed to come preinstalled on any consumer device.

Why? It seems like new API's should be tested with real users before becoming a web standard, and origin trials were a big improvement over what happened before with webkit specific CSS, etc.

Because they have a history of abusing their monopoly on browsers to push new standards that only help them.

Re: Google can keep its Chrome browser but will be barred from exclusive contracts

#109

Post by stackskipton »

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #89
stackskipton wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Under good Monopoly law, you would remedy the situation that got them to this point, not worry about their future. Chrome + Deals got to them to this point so that's what you unwind. If it causes Google to get weakened and AI finishes them off, that's just creative destruction at work and oh well.

> Under good Monopoly law, you would remedy the situation that got them to this point, not worry about their future. I mean but it appears to be being remedy'd by itself why would the court proscribe something for a problem that no longer exists?

Because it happened. If I was stealing cable but then all shows I wanted to watch switched to streaming, should I be let off the hook because situation remedy'd itself? I'd imagine most people would say no, the fact you can no longer do the crime in the future does not change the fact you did the crime in the past.

Re: Google can keep its Chrome browser but will be barred from exclusive contracts

#110

Post by Rohansi »

sothatsit wrote: post #79
bediger4000 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not. I prefer to read the primary sources, LLM summaries are, after all, probabilistic, and based on syntax. I'm often looking for semantics, and an LLM really really is not going to give me that.

Tools like GPT-5 Thinking are actually pretty great at linking you to primary sources. It has become my go-to search tool because even though it is slower, the results are better. Especially for things like finding documentation. I basically only use Google for "take me to this web page I already know exists" queries now, and maps.

> pretty great at linking you to primary sources

Do you check all of the sources though? Those can be hallucinated and you may not notice unless you're always checking them. Or it could have misunderstood the source.

It's easy to assume it's always accurate when it generally is. But it's not always.

Post reply on HN