Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's an opinion from someone who hates you/benefits from convicting you. Hence why the opposing side gets the opportunity to cross-examine the witness, and why it would be a really bad idea to put forward a witness who clearly has a grudge against the accused. In cross you just show they have a grudge and now their testimony is suspect. > Now, if they had actual evidence it'd be different It is actual evidence. I d…
By "actual evidence" people usually mean evidence that can't be discarded as easily as testimony.
Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous
141–150 of 236 posts
Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous
#142I am not following these testimonies in anti-trust cases where they have a competitor of Google testify against Google. Isn’t testifying all about presenting evidence? If I am accused of theft in a criminal court and my arch rival is brought for testimony against me, it doesn’t sound like a fair process to me. Of course if it’s a substantiated material it would make sense but otherwise it doesn’t just makes sense at…
> Google as a search engine is far better than Bing and that’s just a fact. It was better than Bing... Two things: 1) HN and elsewhere constantly point out how bad Google Search is lately 2) The introduction of ChatGPT and DALL-E powered Bing into Edge, the new Windows Sidebar and elsewhere has changed the game. The new Windows 11 Bing/ChatGPT/DALL-E sidebar is so good that my hot-take is that it's going to put a den…
Perhaps it’s coz I’ve minimized my footprint in Google ecosystem but then it just goes to show to what extent Google now relies on personal data to serve search results.
Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous
#143From this case, I'm concerned, apparently threatened:
(A) I have some expertise in computing, worked in and with computing for decades, written some serious software, taught computer science in college and graduate school of famous universities, and published peer-reviewed original research in artificial intelligence.
(B) Now computing is my main activity and the foundation of my business startup.
(C) From credible quotes in the media and (A) and (B) just above, my opinion is that the lawyers and judges in the Google case (a) are poorly informed on and have no meaningful understanding of computing, (b) are often seriously misinformed on computing, and (c) are on the way to doing serious harm to computing, the economy, and my work.
I see no opportunity for this legal case to do any good and would like the DoJ just to say:
"Sorry, never mind. We made a HUGE mistake and now drop the case."
For example:
(1) Operating System. I use versions of Microsoft's Windows, really want to use only one operating system, considered the choices, and picked Windows.
It seems to me that Microsoft continually makes changes to improve Windows.
Some of the changes are for the user experience and user interface. Mostly I find the changes poorly designed and irritating but not a serious problem.
Other changes are for, e.g., computer security and new hardware, and I like those changes a LOT.
I REALLY LIKE their .NET software and its documentation.
I REALLY like the Windows NTFS file system. And I REALLY like the fact that the basics of Windows has been quite reliable, with lots of utility, for 10+ years.
And I intend to start using Windows Server 2019. Versions of Windows Server may be the most important software in the economy of the world.
(2) I have lots of computer programs installed.
Some of the programs I've written myself in various computer languages.
Of course, for me the most important of these programs is the Web site server program I've written for my startup.
Otherwise my most heavily used program is the text editor KEdit, first written by an IBM employee in France, and for that program I've written dozens of macros.
Next is Rexx written by an IBM employee in England, and for that language I've written dozens of programs.
I have the D. Knuth mathematical word processing software TeX which I use for writing nearly all documents, letters, etc. For TeX I've written dozens of macros.
I have a spell checking program Aspell I use heavily.
I have Adobe's Acrobat installed and use it to read some important PDF files.
To keep up with some changes in email standards, I intend to install a recent version of Microsoft Office.
I am a heavy user of the Internet and, thus, of Web browsers. As I type this, the computer has installed Firefox, Chrome, Brave, and Edge. I use all of them, use Firefox the most, may change to use Brave the most, and may install the current version of Chrome.
So, each of these Web browsers is an installed computer program out of some dozens I have installed.
With these Web browsers, I visit Web sites -- thousands of them.
Some of the Web sites are search engines or other means of finding content. Some of the search engines are Google, Bing, and DDG. But I also do searches at Wikipedia, YouTube, Stackoverflow, etc.
(3) Defaults. The legal case has a lot of emphasis on "defaults" in Web browsers and search engines, and to me this emphasis is, understated and in just one word, bad.
For the only such "default", I have set Firefox as my "default" Web browser, but this setting has almost no effect. E.g., if I am using Adobe's Acrobat to read the PDF (portable document format) file for the paper
"Tensor Programs I: Wide Feedforward or Recurrent Neural Networks of Any Architecture are Gaussian Processes"
and in the Acrobat display click on a URL (uniform resource locator) of a Web page, then Acrobat will use my default Web browser to read and display that Web page. I rarely do any such thing and there are other approaches that are plenty easy.
For a "default search engine", I don't have one.
In recent months I've noticed that I can do some Web searches from an HTML single line text box displayed by Firefox, but so far I've never done this. I don't like this feature by Firefox because I see no reason to use it and it takes up limited space in the Firefox window.
Google is just a Web site, and I get to that site just like I get to any of the thousands of other Web sites I go to. No "defaults" are involved.
DoJ, lawyers, judges, please, Please, PLEASE forget about computing, the Internet, computer operating systems, computer programs, Web browsers, Web sites, and search engines. Just FORGET about them.
PLEASE.
Anything you do will be a threat to the economy, my work, and me.
Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Google as a search engine is far better than Bing and that’s just a fact. I have been using DDG for several years now and honestly can't stand Google's results anymore. It seems like you can no longer search for an exact term and at every opportunity they try to slip in a merchant selling something as a result.
I have been using DDG for a few years, and most of the time end up doing !g to go to Google and get good answers. Nothing specific comes to mind right now, but the pattern is like this: me: Who's that guy with a big hat? DDG: showing results for bug hat IN UNITED KINGDOM: 1) Daily Mail woman wearing ladybird hat absolutely destroys woke liberal you won't believe. 2) Best hair cuts for guys who wear hats - generic-seo…
But if you're like me and never evolved from the oldschool search engines and still use the same format of listing key words, DDG is better than or equal to Google.
Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous
#145Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous
#146I don't know how the US anti-trust works, but I'm wondering why hasn't Microsoft ever been investigated about being a monopoly in desktop operating systems?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
>IMHO breaking up corporations is a bit heavy-handed and not the only remedy available. Respectfully disagree in Google's case. Indexing is not their only advantage - having full, unfettered access and control over email, maps, Android play, cloud, and the other myriad divisions plus knows what else via side deals is too much and fully justifies breaking up the business. Your suggestion works if we were still 2002-is…
Microsoft has all the same services that Google has, including the ones you just mentioned and more. Bing, Outlook, Bing Maps, Microsoft Store, Azure, Windows, Edge, Office, OneDrive, XBOX division, and more. If they can't compete with Google, then maybe they aren't offering as good a service for most of these, and it's not for lack of trying to manipulate the market into using their services. I do agree with what yo…
You literally can't make a mobile phone today without having support for all Google services. Native support is better than 3rd party. And now all of your user's data is in Google's hands.
Yes, there are some extreme ... fanatics(?), who can live with a phone that doesn't have YouTube, Gmail, Google Maps, Google Drive or Play Store in it, but the Joe/Jill Regular will never ever go for that today.
Of all the companies beside Apple, Samsung is the only one I can think of with the muscle to maybe do a device with all of their own services.
Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the most part the most direct victims of unfair competition practices are competitors.
The government doesn’t (or shouldn’t) care if a business beats another business in business. They care if doing so harms the consumer by the route of lack of competition leading to higher prices and/or inferior product.
Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous
#149I don't know how the US anti-trust works, but I'm wondering why hasn't Microsoft ever been investigated about being a monopoly in desktop operating systems?
They have. It was quite a big deal at the time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor... .
Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous
#150"Google has argued that the default positions are not overwhelmingly powerful and that users can switch to a new search engine if they like." OK, then why pay Apple close to $20 billion annually to be the "default". "Mr. Schmidtlein hammered Mr. Nadella with questions about instances in which Bing had been the default on mobile phones, only for users to switch back to Google." If Google search is so great, and Apple…
For me, the fact that Google has >50% market share on Edge is proof that Google is right. Consumers clearly know how to change defaults when they want to.