U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology • Hacker News Board

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#181

Post by whatshisface » Tue, Jan 24, 2023, 9:09 PM UTC

basch wrote: post #101

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think your analogy holds here; Instagram was already an active and popular social network before Facebook acquired it, not a "camera app." Did it grow? Certainly. While we don't know what would have happened to it had FB not bought it, it's quite possible FB bought it precisely because it was growing and becoming 'cool.'

Instagram was what, 19 month old when FB bought it? It has 13 employees. It had 0 revenue. It had 30 million people on it. (Facebook hit a billion people in 2012.) It was tiny. It was the hip up-and-coming app. It had the limelight, and importantly to FB it was mobile first. I think our memories like to kind of project back its success after acquisition onto what it was before, and get distorted by its billion dollar…

The law is usually applied in retrospect, for what it's worth.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#182

Post by bobkazamakis » Tue, Jan 24, 2023, 9:10 PM UTC

debacle wrote: post #91

xxpor wrote: post #78

One of the conservative's legal project over the past 50 years main goals has been to maintain a Borkian consumer harm standard for anti-trust. With the current SCOTUS, I don't see much of a realistic path for this.

This isn't a liberal/conservative issue. This is a corporatism issue.

[flagged]

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#183

Post by crazygringo » Tue, Jan 24, 2023, 9:16 PM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #128

basch wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of their businesses that display ads could display ads from AdWords/DoubleClick, Facebook, Microsoft, and Amazon, just like any other website that hosts third party ads.

So now the government is going to force a separation into multiple companies and by doing so increase user tracking and sharing information across companies… Win???

I'm not defending it, but the win would be for website owners who might make slightly more profits, and advertisers who might pay slightly less for ads -- all because increased competition would reduce profits by ad exchanges.

Of course, that's against not just more tracking/sharing as you mention, but also probably significantly worse ad loading times and bloat in general.

It's awfully hard and hypothetical to estimate the impact of either.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#184

Post by lolinder » Tue, Jan 24, 2023, 9:22 PM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #88

thehappypm wrote: post #75

Google 2021 revenue: $258B Meta 2021 revenue: $118B Can someone explain how Google has a monopoly when there are competitors in their league?

Anti-trust lawsuits don't require an absolute monopoly. It requires proving that a company behaved anti-competitively. > The lawsuit said Google had “corrupted legitimate competition in the ad tech industry by engaging in a systematic campaign to seize control of the wide swath of high-tech tools used by publishers, advertisers and brokers to facilitate digital advertising.”

> Anti-trust lawsuits don't require an absolute monopoly. It requires proving that a company behaved anti-competitively.

Indeed, the original purpose of anti-trust laws was to prevent trusts and cartels--multiple companies collectively fixing prices and ensuring that no new entrants can compete.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#185

Post by amadeuspagel » Tue, Jan 24, 2023, 9:25 PM UTC

dekhn wrote: post #173

amadeuspagel wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the vast majority of google searches there are no relevant ads. All these searches are subsidized by someone googling "flights to new york" and booking a flight right there. Google provides an immense public good with free (and mostly ad-free) results to all kinds of questions, which other flight search engines do not. Imagine: A flight search engine as a marketing gimick starts a web search engine, and shows fli…

Dunno about you, but if I search "SFO to NYC", the entire first page (after the Google Flights "onebox") is relevant results and they're not ads- but they effectively are- they're search results that include prices. scrolling down further I see 'sponsored results' (IIUC those are ads inline with the search results).

This google flights "onebox" is what I'm talking about here, and what I assume the parent comment refered to.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#186

Post by jquery » Tue, Jan 24, 2023, 9:26 PM UTC

bkishan wrote: post #5

Ah yes, another case that will likely just end in a $xxxM fine.

Depends on who America elects at the conclusion of the case (see: Microsoft vs Ma Bell)

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#187

Post by tgv » Tue, Jan 24, 2023, 9:29 PM UTC

emodendroket wrote: post #97

I'm kind of sour on antitrust as much of a solution for today's issues. If we had five smaller Googles doing the same thing what would that make better?

I don't understand what you'd want instead. The way I see it, antitrust is the lowest bar in consumer (and business) protection. I'd advocate for more regulation, much more, but that seems unreachable in the current political situation in the US.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#188

Post by emodendroket » Tue, Jan 24, 2023, 9:30 PM UTC

rodgerd wrote: post #175

emodendroket wrote: post #97

I'm kind of sour on antitrust as much of a solution for today's issues. If we had five smaller Googles doing the same thing what would that make better?

Forcing, say, the Google OS (Android/Chromebook) and Browser business to justify its existence independent of the ad-selling business, and YouTube to justify its video-hosting existence independent of the other two would certainly dramatically modify the landscape for all three.

That seems likely, but I don't see it as a foregone conclusion that we'll like the result.

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#189

Post by scarface74 » Tue, Jan 24, 2023, 9:32 PM UTC

jeffbee wrote: post #180

scarface74 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That, at minimum, should be highly illegal. It's wildly anti-competitive when the platform already has home field advantage. So should it also be illegal for third party browsers to keep nagging the user that they should be the default? That’s what Netscape did for years and what Chrome does

In what way does it nag? Apple will nag you to switch to Safari, even if you have literally never used Safari. It just pops up from time to time with a notification that cannot be ignored.

When you launch Chrome you never saw the “make Chrome your default browser” dialog?

Re: U.S. accuses Google of abusing monopoly in ad technology

#190

Post by dekhn » Tue, Jan 24, 2023, 9:32 PM UTC

amadeuspagel wrote: post #185

dekhn wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dunno about you, but if I search "SFO to NYC", the entire first page (after the Google Flights "onebox") is relevant results and they're not ads- but they effectively are- they're search results that include prices. scrolling down further I see 'sponsored results' (IIUC those are ads inline with the search results).

This google flights "onebox" is what I'm talking about here, and what I assume the parent comment refered to.

Yes. Google's Flights product. I'm saying they give it preferential ranking treatment so more people use it (regardless of whether it's a superior product) and I would love it if the government could actually prove that).