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

To Break Google’s Monopoly on Search, Make Its Index Public

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 630 posts

Re: To Break Google’s Monopoly on Search, Make Its Index Public

#151

Post by klntsky »

nova22033 wrote: post #106

Caveat: The author is not a technologists Robert Epstein (born June 19, 1953) is an American psychologist, professor, author, and journalist. He earned his Ph.D. in psychology at Harvard University in 1981, was editor in chief of Psychology Today, He has also made some questionable claims about google manipulating search results to favor Hillary Clinton. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Epstein#cite_note-15 His r…

> It is somewhat difficult to get the Google search bar to suggest negative searches related to Mrs. Clinton

Would be nice to know whether it was because of the search history bubble he lived in or not.

Re: To Break Google’s Monopoly on Search, Make Its Index Public

#152

Post by jorvi »

dalbasal wrote: post #112
noahl wrote: post #61

Okay, this is a relatively serious proposal to require Google to allow API access to its search index, with the premise that it would democratize the search engine ecosystem. There are some issues with the regulations he proposes (you have to allow throttling to prevent DDoS attacks, and you can't let anyone with API access add content to prevent garbage results), but it's roughly feasible. The main problem is, I thi…

I would assess Google (& FB's) "crown jewel" as, ultimately, their market share, which is related to your points... and causation runs both ways. The user data helps/ed Google create the superior UX, as you say. The reach is what makes Google & FB valuable to advertisers. A search engine with 0.1% of Google's user volume cannot charge advertisers 0.1% of Google's as revenue. Returns to scale/reach/market-share are ve…

'Break Google up' would mean you'd have:

* an Office suite / enterprise company (Google Cloud + Docs + Gmail + Business)

* a phone company (Android)

* a search company (Google Search + Advertisement)

* and a media company (Google Play Movies, Music, Books and YouTube)

The names would probably become different in time, but you get the gist.

Amazon and Microsoft could be broken up much the same way, in neat categorical 'silos'. Facebook should be trisected into Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram again. I have no idea how you would break Apple up without utterly destroying their core principle, vertical integration. There is no way to do what Apple does with MacBooks or iPhones if they don't control the entire stack. I'm not saying they shouldn't be, I just see no way.

Re: To Break Google’s Monopoly on Search, Make Its Index Public

#153

Post by nova22033 »

briandear wrote: post #138
nova22033 wrote: post #106

Caveat: The author is not a technologists Robert Epstein (born June 19, 1953) is an American psychologist, professor, author, and journalist. He earned his Ph.D. in psychology at Harvard University in 1981, was editor in chief of Psychology Today, He has also made some questionable claims about google manipulating search results to favor Hillary Clinton. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Epstein#cite_note-15 His r…

> He has also made some questionable claims about google manipulating search results to favor Hillary Clinton. Despite it being off topic, can we define why those claims are questionable? Is their data proving those claims wrong? Because with all the Google political controversies over the past few years, and given the political donation history of Google employees, it’s highly plausible that search results are manip…

>Despite it being off topic, can we define why those claims are questionable?

the claims are questionable because his methodology is questionable. If he claims google is biased, he should have a good peer reviewable study that proves this..not google is biased because google didn't auto prompt me with "created AIDS" when I typed in hillary Clinton....

And he's the one making the claim that google is biased...The burden of proof is on HIM.

This is a forum for people in the tech world, right? Shouldn't we question N=1 "studies"?

Re: To Break Google’s Monopoly on Search, Make Its Index Public

#154

Post by Ericson2314 »

jorvi wrote: post #152
dalbasal wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would assess Google (& FB's) "crown jewel" as, ultimately, their market share, which is related to your points... and causation runs both ways. The user data helps/ed Google create the superior UX, as you say. The reach is what makes Google & FB valuable to advertisers. A search engine with 0.1% of Google's user volume cannot charge advertisers 0.1% of Google's as revenue. Returns to scale/reach/market-share are ve…

'Break Google up' would mean you'd have: * an Office suite / enterprise company (Google Cloud + Docs + Gmail + Business) * a phone company (Android) * a search company (Google Search + Advertisement) * and a media company (Google Play Movies, Music, Books and YouTube) The names would probably become different in time, but you get the gist. Amazon and Microsoft could be broken up much the same way, in neat categorical…

I rather cleave them all vertically anyways, rather than be left with a bunch of mini horizontal monopolies.

Granted most of your examples wouldn't be, except for search, but it still seems more interesting to me to just have a bunch of mini googles made from cleaving teams. Certainly that would make for some crazier competition.

Re: To Break Google’s Monopoly on Search, Make Its Index Public

#155

Post by muro »

jorvi wrote: post #152
dalbasal wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would assess Google (& FB's) "crown jewel" as, ultimately, their market share, which is related to your points... and causation runs both ways. The user data helps/ed Google create the superior UX, as you say. The reach is what makes Google & FB valuable to advertisers. A search engine with 0.1% of Google's user volume cannot charge advertisers 0.1% of Google's as revenue. Returns to scale/reach/market-share are ve…

'Break Google up' would mean you'd have: * an Office suite / enterprise company (Google Cloud + Docs + Gmail + Business) * a phone company (Android) * a search company (Google Search + Advertisement) * and a media company (Google Play Movies, Music, Books and YouTube) The names would probably become different in time, but you get the gist. Amazon and Microsoft could be broken up much the same way, in neat categorical…

For Google, you missed the part that makes most money.

Re: To Break Google’s Monopoly on Search, Make Its Index Public

#156

Post by est »

noahl wrote: post #61

Okay, this is a relatively serious proposal to require Google to allow API access to its search index, with the premise that it would democratize the search engine ecosystem. There are some issues with the regulations he proposes (you have to allow throttling to prevent DDoS attacks, and you can't let anyone with API access add content to prevent garbage results), but it's roughly feasible. The main problem is, I thi…

Index them is not hard, ranking them to yield a useful first page is.

Re: To Break Google’s Monopoly on Search, Make Its Index Public

#157

Post by linuxftw »

rpiguy wrote: post #37
linuxftw wrote: post #18

This idea is a pipe dream. It would be nationalizing property, it's never going to happen in the US. If you want to enforce anti-trust actions against google's app store policies, I'm all for that. But forcing them to give away property is insane.

The difference in this case is that the usual defenders of private property rights and libertarianism feel as though Google is suppressing them removing the usual roadblock to this kind reform. This is a rare instance where anti-corporate leftists and dejected right wingers could actually do something substantive together. In most cases I would agree with you the defenders of private industry are pretty fierce in the…

Some people are arguing that catering search results or what content is allowed on a platform to a specific set of political views makes those platforms publishers rather than mere platforms. Apparently this also has some implications in some political campaign laws I don't really understand.

I think we're heading towards political ideologies having the same protection as religious institutions (which IMO, are exactly the same in all practical matters).

Re: To Break Google’s Monopoly on Search, Make Its Index Public

#159

Post by jorvi »

muro wrote: post #155
jorvi wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Break Google up' would mean you'd have: * an Office suite / enterprise company (Google Cloud + Docs + Gmail + Business) * a phone company (Android) * a search company (Google Search + Advertisement) * and a media company (Google Play Movies, Music, Books and YouTube) The names would probably become different in time, but you get the gist. Amazon and Microsoft could be broken up much the same way, in neat categorical…

For Google, you missed the part that makes most money.

Thanks, I completely glossed over that since to me their advertisement division is inextricably linked to their search division. Added!

Re: To Break Google’s Monopoly on Search, Make Its Index Public

#160

Post by Nasrudith »

ng12 wrote: post #85

I don't understand why we are talking about this. Google is far from the first "monopoly" that I would like to see broken up. My guess is that Google's not lobbying effectively.

Because their even more monopolistic competitors are pissed, journalists are pisses because the world changed on them and they have to compete, combined with radicals with a persecution complex and a "no the children are wrong" attitude towards their opinions being unpopular. The tech break up push is one big hypocritical circle jerk from every party.
Post reply on HN