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

Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 236 posts

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#191

Post by jojobas »

throwaway892238 wrote: post #141
jojobas wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By "actual evidence" people usually mean evidence that can't be discarded as easily as testimony.

If the testimony is easily dismissable, then submitting it would be bad for their case. They wouldn't submit it as evidence unless it could be backed up or was reasonable. It's a serious mistake to underestimate testimony as somehow less useful in a case.

"He said, she said" is easy to dismiss. "He said, she presented a CCTV recording" is a different story.

Hard/soft evidence are established legal terms.

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#192

Post by layer8 »

matteoraso wrote: post #124
TerrifiedMouse wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t get why he saying “MS can’t compete” matters. It doesn’t mean it’s in any way true. MS has almost every opportunity that Google has when it comes to search. They fail to compete simply because they aren’t good enough. Google being default on Chrome the leading browser? Edge freaking comes with Windows and defaults to Bing. Google being default on iOS? MS has every opportunity to take Google's spot on iOS. The…

>Google being default on Chrome the leading browser? This is why Microsoft won't win. Google obviously isn't going to not use their own search engine on their own browser, and that's totally fine. I'm not sure what Google can even do to reduce the market share of their search engine besides intentionally making it worse than Bing.

They can be broken uo so that the entity making the browser is not the same entity operating the search engine anymore. If course, the same would apply to Edge and Bing.

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#193

Post by madeofpalk »

whiddershins wrote: post #74
lolinder wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an antitrust trial your competitors are by definition victims of the monopolistic behavior that is being alleged. Yes, there will be a conflict of interest in their testimony that needs to be accounted for, but it's not unreasonable for the victim in a court case to testify of the manner in which they feel victimized. Regarding your analogy, it would be more like if you're accused of stealing from your arch rival…

The victims are the public. Edit: to clarify, I believe this is the actual legal basis of anti monopoly legislation. Protection of the interests of the public, not competitor companies.

Right - and that's why the Government, representing the public, are suing. Microsoft is just a "witness" to the public being victims.

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#194

Post by madeofpalk »

zitsarethecure wrote: post #49

> "We believe the marketplace should determine what innovations consumers want." - Microsoft, 1998 https://news.microsoft.com/1998/04/09/microsoft-advertisemen...

It's not super surprising that a company is saying potentially contradicting things (over a period of 28 years) to defend or promote their interests...

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#195

Post by lotsofpulp »

ffgjgf1 wrote: post #166
lotsofpulp wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Well, actually, Google paying other companies to make Google the default is stopping Bing from getting traffic. I cannot see how this is true. Microsoft, with its tens of billions in annual profits, can invest in all the advertising in the world, literally, to let people know how to change the default browser on their iOS or Android device. It is a trivial setting to change. What is not trivial, for Microsoft, is cr…

> It is a trivial setting to change. Most/many people won’t it undeniably gives a massive advantage to google.

Sure, let’s change it to “it is trivial for Microsoft to spend its greater than Google’s profit to buy the default search position on Apple devices.”

So they can other have a just as good as Google’s product that they do not want to spend enough on to make default, or they do not offer enough of a value proposition for people to go to settings -> Safari -> default search -> bing.

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#196

Post by passwordoops »

jppittma wrote: post #190
anon25783 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the only reason the US economy is not a complete dumpster fire. The US economy is a complete dumpster fire for those of us worth less than seven figures. Big tech monopolization does not strengthen our productive capacity, and breaking up the big tech companies won't weaken it. If anything, it will strengthen the economy by making it more viable to found a tech startup without the explicit goal of being bought out.…

Idk. This makes me super nervous. Look at what the bell breakup did for innovation in software. The transistor was literally invented there before it was broken up. Likewise, I think it's probable that if Google is broken up, you'll not see anything as innovative as the transformer models, GFS, or Spanner anymore. I think quality of life for employees will likely go down, as it did when bell labs was broken up.

Different time. Bell was one of the last great break ups and occurred just before the modern pro-Big Business, ultra-financialized era kicked off in earnest. If Bell weren't broken up, Bell labs would have been shut down or severely trimmed regardless as the execs diverted the R&D spend to stock buybacks or other inefficient use of funds that benefits the shareholders over all else (e.g. Boeing).

I think a better parallel is the late-20s early-30s Robber Baron breakups. There's been much ink and elections spilled over how that anti-trust era contributed directly to the proliferation of post-war innovation (e.g. https://bookshop.org/p/books/goliath-the-100-year-war-betwee...)

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#197

Post by sensanaty »

lolinder wrote: post #61
anon25783 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To give the benefit of the doubt to the court, it might be justifiable on the grounds that the big tech giants form an oligopoly, i.e. that they aren't really competing businesses so much as a half-formal conglomerate of corporations whose separateness is a legal fiction to ward off antitrust. But I share your confusion. The case for Microsoft and Google being part of an oligopoly together doesn't really hold water,…

Why would Google's competitors be barred from testifying in a case that hinges on whether Google is using unfair advantages to beat its competitors? The competition is one of the primary victims of the alleged antitrust violations, of course the government is going to ask them to testify and explain how they've been hurt by Google's behavior!

Is it unfair if they're both scummy companies with infinitely deep pockets? Micro$oft just doesn't pay as much as Google does to make Google the default search, but knowing M$, they'd happily do the same shit if it made sense for them.

If DDG or Kagi were the ones complaining here, then that makes sense because indeed their pockets don't run as deep as Google's or M$'s and that's unfair, but M$ complaining just sounds like the one comically evil megacorp taking advantage of the situation to get the other comically evil megacorp in trouble for shit they're doing themselves on a smaller scale.

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#199

Post by makomk »

lolinder wrote: post #55
bettercallsalad wrote: post #27

I 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…

In an antitrust trial your competitors are by definition victims of the monopolistic behavior that is being alleged. Yes, there will be a conflict of interest in their testimony that needs to be accounted for, but it's not unreasonable for the victim in a court case to testify of the manner in which they feel victimized. Regarding your analogy, it would be more like if you're accused of stealing from your arch rival…

The main way that Microsoft has been harmed by Google's actions is that they can no longer pay companies like mobile phone networks to lock search on their devices to Bing and prevent users from changing it, because Google outbid them. Google haven't even blocked users from changing their search engine like Microsoft did because their product is good enough that they don't need to. I think what Microsoft are hoping for is that Google will be legally barred from bidding against them so that they can go back to using this tactic unchallenged.

Re: Microsoft CEO testifies that Google’s power in search is ubiquitous

#200

Post by cmrdporcupine »

jiggawatts wrote: post #3

One way Google maintains their monopoly is that many websites block all bots except for the Google indexing bot. This makes it literally impossible for anyone to make a competing search engine because millions of doors are slammed in their face. There is no practical way to negotiate access at this scale either leaving no options for small startups — e.g.: AI-based search! One possible anti-monopoly measure would be…

Agree on the first part, but I think actually this is an argument for breaking them up along those lines.

I've often said that the "breaking up" of Google that makes the most sense is to split the crawling/indexing service from the rest of the company. Similar to the way telecoms companies were forced -- in some countries -- to open up access to e.g. DSL infrastructure.

Post reply on HN