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

United States vs. Google

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 353 posts

Re: United States vs. Google

#111

Post by pbalau »

residentfoam wrote: post #62

If I were the US authorities, I'd start asking/demanding Google to stop SSO across Search/GMail/Browser. Just because I am a GMail user does not automatically mean that you can trace all my web search. In addition, I'd demand removing Captcha-alike when using VPN services, to avoid them from tracking my IP. I mean, even if you are not logged-in, they can still correlate IPs across products.

> In addition, I'd demand removing Captcha-alike when using VPN services, to avoid them from tracking my IP.

You'll demand that from whom? Is not Google that plops the captcha in your face, is the particular webiste/app that is doing it. Is the same thing as with the Facebook trackers/buttons.

Re: United States vs. Google

#112

Post by dehrmann »

mbesto wrote: post #80
VikingCoder wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) best search engine 2) top online ad platform 3) top mobile OS 4) top video streaming service 5) top internet browser 6) top mapping/navigation service Okay, you listed 6. What should the law say is the new limit for how many they should be able to have?

The same antitrust law that dictated breaking up AT&T and Standard Oil (among others): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_antitrust_law#Mo...

I don't think breaking up AT&T was a success story. Instead of a national monopoly, you got regional ones and a long-distance provider. It was all still very over-pried and silly. The situation didn't improve for consumers until cell phone plans got close to the price of landlines.

Re: United States vs. Google

#113

Post by VikingCoder »

mcbutterbunz wrote: post #57
VikingCoder wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) best search engine 2) top online ad platform 3) top mobile OS 4) top video streaming service 5) top internet browser 6) top mapping/navigation service Okay, you listed 6. What should the law say is the new limit for how many they should be able to have?

It's not the number that OP is arguing, its this: > Their assets give them undue and unsupervised influence over a very big chunk of what's happening online. This gives them ability to control big part of collective human consciousness, across languages and borders.

Actually, they said,

"I do have a problem with them being the best [six things], at the SAME time."

It's reasonable to read that as the OP thinks the number should be less then 6.

Yes, they also said other things, but I think I'm giving them a fair read of that sentence.

Re: United States vs. Google

#114

Post by deelowe »

TuringNYC wrote: post #88
VikingCoder wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) best search engine 2) top online ad platform 3) top mobile OS 4) top video streaming service 5) top internet browser 6) top mapping/navigation service Okay, you listed 6. What should the law say is the new limit for how many they should be able to have?

Are there any anti-competitive behaviors they have engaged in w/r/t #3, #4, #5, and #6 or would this just be punishment for punishment sake? I remember browsers before Chrome and Firefox. They were terrible. I'd love to see why Google should be punished for making a good product. I'm open to a good explanation. Same for Youtube. I cut my cable because we now get all our entertainment from Netflix and Youtube. We dont…

Also for youtube, how many people are now able to make a living producing content which they fully own and have control over the means of distribution?

Re: United States vs. Google

#115

Post by deelowe »

aloisdg wrote: post #55
VikingCoder wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) best search engine 2) top online ad platform 3) top mobile OS 4) top video streaming service 5) top internet browser 6) top mapping/navigation service Okay, you listed 6. What should the law say is the new limit for how many they should be able to have?

Lets say 1.

So the ad business, which generates all the revenue is split off from everything else. All the various services including search die b/c they can't self sustain and all that's left is an ad platform akin to the former double click scenario. Now what?

Re: United States vs. Google

#116

Post by abvdasker »

One thing I wish the piece touched on is the way that these platforms have evolved into anti-competitive environments due to a kind of vertical integration.

Google doesn't just control the operating system or the OEMs. Their agreements with OEMs benefit their own applications over the competition's, effectively allowing Google to leverage its power as a platform to benefit its apps developed for its platform. We've seen the exact same dynamic play out with Amazon and its products. It's only this year that Apple has allowed third party apps to serve as replacements for its default web browser and other apps on iOS. This particular kind of anticompetitive behavior definitely meets the standard of negatively affecting consumers because of the extent to which it intentionally limits the end-user's ability to choose the competition.

Re: United States vs. Google

#117

Post by thayne »

rland wrote: post #109

> there is a strain of political thought in America, independent of political party (although traditionally associated with Democrats), that is inherently allergic to concentrated power — monopoly in the populist sense, if not the legal one. > Hatred of monopoly is one of the oldest American political habits and like most profound traditions In what country does the author live? Americans are so used to concentrated…

I think most Americans are unhappy with this situation. But we feel powerless to change it. We may have the right to vote, but we don't have options to vote for anyone that is incentivized to change the status quo.

Re: United States vs. Google

#118

Post by [deleted] »

rland wrote: post #109

> there is a strain of political thought in America, independent of political party (although traditionally associated with Democrats), that is inherently allergic to concentrated power — monopoly in the populist sense, if not the legal one. > Hatred of monopoly is one of the oldest American political habits and like most profound traditions In what country does the author live? Americans are so used to concentrated…

[deleted]

Re: United States vs. Google

#119

Post by bastardoperator »

rland wrote: post #109

> there is a strain of political thought in America, independent of political party (although traditionally associated with Democrats), that is inherently allergic to concentrated power — monopoly in the populist sense, if not the legal one. > Hatred of monopoly is one of the oldest American political habits and like most profound traditions In what country does the author live? Americans are so used to concentrated…

Don't bat an eye? Healthcare has been the largest debate in this country for the last 8 years.

Re: United States vs. Google

#120

Post by dsabanin »

VikingCoder wrote: post #113
mcbutterbunz wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the number that OP is arguing, its this: > Their assets give them undue and unsupervised influence over a very big chunk of what's happening online. This gives them ability to control big part of collective human consciousness, across languages and borders.

Actually, they said, "I do have a problem with them being the best [six things], at the SAME time." It's reasonable to read that as the OP thinks the number should be less then 6. Yes, they also said other things, but I think I'm giving them a fair read of that sentence.

It's not in the number of the products, it's in the scale of each of those products and the influence that they give them.
Post reply on HN