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

The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 718 posts

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#161

Post by jfengel »

relaxing wrote: post #136
Muromec wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already pivoted to hire offshore workers, so why would they care

Offshoring as the supposed death of the US software developer going on 40 years now remains greatly exaggerated.

And I still don't understand why. I expected it when I started my career, and here nearing the end it's still really rare. And it should have gotten easier in that time, what with the Internet.

Time zones and culture and language and all that, I suppose. But the world is full of very smart people who have a decent grasp of American and European culture, and would work for a tenth the price.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#162

Post by crote »

user3939382 wrote: post #134

If you look carefully at the Chromium project, it’s made up of teams that specialize in different components. The majority of the members of those teams are in turn Google employees. Presumably they have the best qualifications to be on those teams. I don’t see how a DOJ decision against Google would change any of that. Ban Google employees from participating in the project? And then who would replace them?

Same way it worked in the past with monopolies like Ma Bell?

Those teams can keep working on Chrome, they'll just have to fall under some new kind of separate Chrome Inc. structure instead of under Google Inc., and Google will have to sell most of its shares of Chrome Inc. to third parties.

Splitting off Chrome really isn't the problem. Making the new Chrome Inc. profitable without accepting bribes from big tech, on the other hand...

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#164

Post by timewizard »

user3939382 wrote: post #134

If you look carefully at the Chromium project, it’s made up of teams that specialize in different components. The majority of the members of those teams are in turn Google employees. Presumably they have the best qualifications to be on those teams. I don’t see how a DOJ decision against Google would change any of that. Ban Google employees from participating in the project? And then who would replace them?

> Presumably they have the best qualifications to be on those teams.

What exactly are "best qualifications?" More simply are you assuming that myself and Google share a definition of "best qualified?" I genuinely don't believe that we do.

> And then who would replace them?

People working for a different company. Is your case that without Google no one would make web browsers?

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#165

Post by gjsman-1000 »

theptip wrote: post #160
user3939382 wrote: post #134

If you look carefully at the Chromium project, it’s made up of teams that specialize in different components. The majority of the members of those teams are in turn Google employees. Presumably they have the best qualifications to be on those teams. I don’t see how a DOJ decision against Google would change any of that. Ban Google employees from participating in the project? And then who would replace them?

But we are not discussing Chromium. Google’s browser is Chrome, and that product has search exclusivity deals that have been deemed monopolistic. Google could divest the Chrome product and keep contributing to Chromium, but the value proposition is really unclear when that OSS investment doesn’t buy you billions of dollars of browser lock-in value.

Thus why the Linux Foundation is gunning for Chromium. (When do we rename the Linux Foundation? Only 3.2% of their revenue goes to Linux development these days...)

https://www.linuxfoundation.org/press/linux-foundation-annou...

https://www.linuxfoundation.org/supporters-of-chromium-based...

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#166

Post by pclmulqdq »

modulus1 wrote: post #159
pclmulqdq wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is an ads company owning a web browser, OS, and search engine, and using that control over how users interact with the internet to outcompete everyone else. You left out Google's raison d'etre from your statement.

MS and Apple have the same thing, they're just less successful. Just a browser and an OS was previously seen as antitrust (and it looks like MS is being anti-competitive in this space still). Just a browser and a search engine can allow anti-competitive behavior. Or just a search engine and an ads platform... The problem is the anti-competitive behavior. Businesses are generally rational actors, so clearly our system…

MS and Apple aren't companies who sell ads. MS and Apple are companies who sell tech products. Everyone analogizing the current situation with Google to Microsoft in 1999 is missing the core of the facts here. The Apple/Epic Games antitrust suits are much more similar to MS in 1999, but Google's antitrust issues are very different.

Google's product isn't its software, it's the attention of its users. Having this large and this dominant of a software/data platform attached to a company that sells attention is anti-competitive in the attention market.

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#167

Post by realitysballs »

user3939382 wrote: post #134

If you look carefully at the Chromium project, it’s made up of teams that specialize in different components. The majority of the members of those teams are in turn Google employees. Presumably they have the best qualifications to be on those teams. I don’t see how a DOJ decision against Google would change any of that. Ban Google employees from participating in the project? And then who would replace them?

Think about difference between Brave and Chrome. Both Chromium browsers but Brave is much less intrusive and exploitative of user data. More Brave and less Chrome would allow average user greater privacy and less reliance on large corporations perhaps

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#169

Post by pessimizer »

techpineapple wrote: post #36
lolinder wrote: post #11

To try to stem the tide of "Trump will just make this go away because ${corruption}", I want to remind everyone of a few things: * This is not a Biden-admin lawsuit. It was launched by the first Trump admin. * Of the 14 co-plaintiffs, only 1 (CA) is a state that didn't vote for Trump in 2024. The Colorado Plaintiff States include another 16 red states, for a total of 29 red states represented. As much as it's trendy…

“ As much as it's trendy in 2025 to talk about this admin as though it's entirely unprincipled, it's actually been doing exactly what it said it would do to satisfy its base.” Most Arguments in both directions are basically unprovable and amount to propaganda at this point. Degrees matter. Saying “people voted for this”, which both sides say with different directionality, is mostly away to convince people to either s…

[flagged]

Re: The DOJ still wants Google to sell off Chrome

#170

Post by manquer »

azinman2 wrote: post #145
manquer wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Advantage where ? Chinese tech companies are not competing outside China with one notable exception of TikTok (1) . Global tech companies do not compete in China, the market is brutal for non Chinese companies with level of espionage, theft, sabotage that is allowed. It is really small world for big tech, the same 5-10 companies dominate most of the world in most frequently used consumer products, and using that domi…

> Chinese tech companies are not competing outside China with one notable exception of TikTok (1) . This is absolutely not true. Most phones in Africa are Chinese now. Chinese internet companies are all over Asia outside of Japan/SK. Chinese cars (EVs, which arguably are tech), are now world-wide.

Tech companies or big tech conventionally usually mean software companies.

Every company is a tech company, if you want to be broad in your definition, they have to use tech to compete .

Actions on Chinese EV cars are either being seriously considered or already in effect in most major car markets.

All phones have been always more or less Chinese made forever including Apple, even Chinese badging is how it been for low/mid range for 10 years now, maybe Samsung does some local manufacturing in SK but no one else major does.

Budget phones or budget EVs with razor thin margins is not big tech and no DoJ action to break up Google is going to affect the way they are becoming Chinese or already are .

There is reason TikTok is the most valuable Chinese company and not a phone company, big tech have big margins and strong market effect on their own and not as a group (I.e. it would be hard to beat Chinese companies in a space , but no individual one (say byd) is irreplaceable by another Chinese company

Post reply on HN