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

US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 888 posts

Re: US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case

#141

Post by wilsonnb3 »

crazygringo wrote: post #86
ClassyJacket wrote: post #6

They biggest web advertising company definitely shouldn't control the world's most popular browser. Just like we all knew they would, they're blocking ad blockers, and this problem will only get worse. Tell your friends to use Firefox, people.

> they're blocking ad blockers I've tried uBlock Origin Lite on Chrome and it works... perfectly. I haven't noticed a single ad get through. And isn't it supposed to be a lot more performant? Before, I assumed Chrome really was trying to gradually stop ad-blocking. But now that I see it's had literally zero impact, at least on the sites I visit, I'm starting to wonder what all the fuss was about. Was manifest v3 real…

> Meanwhile, you can't install adblocking on iOS Safari as an extension at all. But I never hear anybody bringing that up.

There are a bunch of safari ad blockers in the app store that work the same way manifest v3 blockers work.

Re: US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case

#142

Post by dvngnt_ »

idle_zealot wrote: post #134
richwater wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> results in a materially worse world. Please explain how Google has created a materially worse world

Uh, I did. That's what the whole "surveillance system" part of the post was. Also I think advertisements in general are harmful.

how do people learn of products?

Re: US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case

#143

Post by elevatedastalt »

voisin wrote: post #116
geor9e wrote: post #113

HN is a special place but among the average folk, I get why 90% of people use google. I'm no google fan, but it still baffles me how bad the alternatives still are. Especially with so many companies scraping the whole web for AI data, and so many GPUs chugging on that data. I suppose they are all focused on replacing the concept of search results with LLM prose. Ironically bing is down at the moment https://downdetec…

> I'm no google fan, but it still baffles me how bad the alternatives still are. I have such a hard time understanding your position on this. Google search results are absolute trash now, compared to DuckDuckGo.

DuckDuckGo can have a seat at the table when they implement their own search index.

Putting a sticker on Bing and Yandex results doesn't make a Search company.

Re: US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case

#144

Post by bhelkey »

idle_zealot wrote: post #105
ruthmarx wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would happen if you replaced Google with a perfect functional equivalent? Well, nothing. You don't happen to know where one could find these magical perfectly compatible and functional drop in replacements, do you?

The closest thing to a unique offering that they have is YouTube. What other services don't have perfectly reasonable replacements ready and waiting?

Android makes up ~70% of the global phone marketshare [1]. Google maps makes up 70% of the mapping marketshare [2]. Chrome makes up ~65% of the browser marketshare [3]. Those are three of the nine products Google has with over a billion users [4].

[1] https://backlinko.com/iphone-vs-android-statistics

[2] https://www.thestreet.com/technology/big-tech-working-to-cha...

[3] https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share

[4] https://01core.substack.com/p/google-has-9-products-with-ove...

Re: US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case

#145

Post by soperj »

strongpigeon wrote: post #136

Something I really don't get is the part about Google's monopoly in search text ads. FTA: > Finally, the filing said Google’s dominance over search text ads needed to be addressed by lowering barriers to would-be rivals or licensing its ad feed to others, independently from search results. What Google has is a monopoly on search (which is bad), but I don't think having a monopoly for advertising on your own property…

>low scrupules ad platforms

In this case, the search provider is the low scruples ad platform. Bing as well.

Re: US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case

#146

Post by asdff »

If they did this 15 year ago, I bet google reader would still be actively maintained today. More innovation is possible when there are smaller companies working on fewer things. Yes there are economies of scale with large entities, but you then run up against the economy of shareholder attention if your little effort within the larger organization is not the current golden child of the day. When you work at a smaller company, that little effort is the entire company's product. It has to work and get better to succeed. It can't be forgotten about and left to languish like so many potentially great products and technologies that are chained to some large org today.

Re: US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case

#147

Post by ksenzee »

richwater wrote: post #118
idle_zealot wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no point in chasing a high GDP when it results in a materially worse world. The point of a society isn't to make the numbers go up. If a monopoly is super efficient at generating some nebulous concept of value by creating and operating the world's largest surveillance system and actively using it to sell influence over people's attention and habits then the only sensible thing to do is to dismantle it.

> results in a materially worse world. Please explain how Google has created a materially worse world

The choices are not “Google as it currently exists” vs “a world without Google,” but rather “Google as it currently exists” and “Google as subject to stricter regulation.” There’s a fair case to be made that the world is worse than it would have been if the US had kept a tighter rein on Google.

Re: US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case

#148

Post by ssklash »

dvngnt_ wrote: post #142
idle_zealot wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, I did. That's what the whole "surveillance system" part of the post was. Also I think advertisements in general are harmful.

how do people learn of products?

If ads are the only way people are able to learn about products, then there is clearly a massive failure of imagination, as well as innovation. People know what they need, and have always known. The concept of exploiting human psychology in order to sell more of a product to people who likely don't need it is a relatively recent development in human history. Plus you can just search for stuff you need in a search engine...

Re: US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case

#149

Post by tannhaeuser »

geor9e wrote: post #113

HN is a special place but among the average folk, I get why 90% of people use google. I'm no google fan, but it still baffles me how bad the alternatives still are. Especially with so many companies scraping the whole web for AI data, and so many GPUs chugging on that data. I suppose they are all focused on replacing the concept of search results with LLM prose. Ironically bing is down at the moment https://downdetec…

HN isn't that special a place considering nerds think about Google as a "search engine" lol.

Google/Alphabet, first and foremost, is the largest online advertiser via its acquisitions of YouTube, DoubleClick, and others, in addition to selling ad placement on Google Search via AdWords, plus a growing number of consumer portals for price comparisons etc. integrated with Google Search (leaving out tracking your activity on Android devices, Google's cloud business, and Books/scholar). The immediate antitrust perspective starts by looking at Alphabet/Google subsidiaries both providing search results and ads on the pages listed in search results (and to a lesser degree even by pushing Google services via Google Search). This is what had ruined the web in more than one way.

Re: US weighs Google break-up in landmark antitrust case

#150

Post by asdff »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #139

DeepMind wouldn’t have happened to the level it did had google been broken up prior.

What might deep mind have looked like today if it were given the same resources in an academic or national lab setting and no ultimate profit motive?
Post reply on HN