Live data from Hacker News

Why we're saying no to Google

blog.ecosia.org

21–30 of 92 posts

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#21

>Android users deserve the option to freely choose their search engine, and that choice should not be auctioned off to the highest bidder. Man, Google is getting some SERIOUS mileage out of removing "Don't Be Evil" from their mission statement.

That phrased stopped being their mission statement in the spring of 2018.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#22
post #10
post #3

This behaviour of Google shows that the fines of the EU are still not high enough.

It shows me to me that the EC shouldn’t have meddled to begin with. Android is free but Google isn’t providing it out of the goodness of its heart. If it can’t recoup its costs from offering the Google suite of apps (including search), then Android will be monetized by other search engines paying to be included in the options. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

To me, it demonstrates the fines aren't an adequate remedy: Google still turned it into a profit model. The EC needed to split up Google, and force Google to divest Android if they wanted to remain in business there. (Note that if you ask Google why they created Android, it reads something like "out of the goodness of our heart", but it's bull. It's about ensuring everyone's on a platform that defaults to Google services for everything.)

Note that the EC can yet still tell Google that it's solution isn't adequate and not compliant.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#23
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It shows me to me that the EC shouldn’t have meddled to begin with. Android is free but Google isn’t providing it out of the goodness of its heart. If it can’t recoup its costs from offering the Google suite of apps (including search), then Android will be monetized by other search engines paying to be included in the options. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

I'd be okay with your objection if I could pay to have the spying/data gathering turned off, like the Kindles offer with ads/no ads. But you can't, probably because the world would go crazy if someone finally puts a price on personal data. Sucks if their business model isn't profitable with current legislation, but they aren't the first company something like that has happened to. And they're hardly a bastion of ethi…

> if I could pay to have the spying/data gathering turned off, like the Kindles offer with ads/no ads

What makes you think that paying to disable ads also disables data gathering? Does Amazon say this?

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#24
post #6

This sounds like 'I want money by being "not google" and thus people have to like me'. The linked website doesn't point to anything else but that they're allegedly planting trees for (an unknown percentage of the money collected by) showing ads to users. Which is nice, but if you want that I support tree planting initiatives explicitly (which I do), why don't you just encourage someone doing just that, maybe by point…

The ongoing attacks on Google are crazy to me. Google has done wonders for all of us - remember how terrible search engines used to be? Do you remember how terrible email was before Gmail? How awful MapQuest was before Google maps? In my opinion these attacks are a paid PR driven distraction from the truly evil actors in the world - see the losses of freedom for people in Hong Kong or citizens of Russia who been impr…

Your "dont throw the baby out with the bathwater" sentiment i find criminally underrated in todays cancel-culture.

Its so mindless and terrifying, like the mechanism for the banality of evil was just copy and pasted but since its not ethnonationalism no one notices or cares.

To understand how google got the way it is requires an acknowledgement from all of our direct and vigorous contributions. The parable of the frog and scorpion is one of shared responsibility, not of faultless victim and malcious aggressor.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#25
I feel pretty strongly that Google (and Apple) should be forced to offer a choice for default search engine on their mobile devices. Microsoft was pretty handily sued and accused of antitrust for not offering this option on Windows desktop browsers. Google benefitted a great deal from that and it only makes sense that they should have to play by the same rules.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#26

This sounds like 'I want money by being "not google" and thus people have to like me'. The linked website doesn't point to anything else but that they're allegedly planting trees for (an unknown percentage of the money collected by) showing ads to users. Which is nice, but if you want that I support tree planting initiatives explicitly (which I do), why don't you just encourage someone doing just that, maybe by point…

The linked website doesn't point to anything else but that they're allegedly planting trees for (an unknown percentage of the money collected by) showing ads to users I don't really care what Ecosia's motive is; I never even heard of it before now. What Google is doing is simply wrong. Anyone who can't see that has been in the SV bubble too long. "Oh, the EU says we have to give people a choice to promote fairness an…

> It would be interesting if none of the other search engines participate in this auction. Then what is Google going to do? Ignore the EU and suck up another billion dollar fine?

The FAQ answers that already. It will choose randomly from among the search engines that register and don't offer a bid (and charge them nothing). That would be a really surprising outcome, as it would suggest that no one other than Google derives any economic value from being the search engine on an Android device.

FWIW, I have trouble imagining that this process was designed without consulting with the EU to ensure it would comply. If Google did indeed design this without ensuring that it is in compliance, that would imply that whoever they have working on this is colossally stupid.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#27

I feel pretty strongly that Google (and Apple) should be forced to offer a choice for default search engine on their mobile devices. Microsoft was pretty handily sued and accused of antitrust for not offering this option on Windows desktop browsers. Google benefitted a great deal from that and it only makes sense that they should have to play by the same rules.

That's exactly the process this article is referencing. Google is being forced to offer a default choice in the EU. They are using a market-based auction price method to determine which of their competitors value the spots the most. The company in question has an objection as to how the options are being selected.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#28

I feel pretty strongly that Google (and Apple) should be forced to offer a choice for default search engine on their mobile devices. Microsoft was pretty handily sued and accused of antitrust for not offering this option on Windows desktop browsers. Google benefitted a great deal from that and it only makes sense that they should have to play by the same rules.

Safari on iOS does (options are Google, Yahoo, Bing, and DuckDuckGo on iOS 12.4). A brief search indicates that there are similar options on Android as well, though I don't have a device to confirm.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be okay with your objection if I could pay to have the spying/data gathering turned off, like the Kindles offer with ads/no ads. But you can't, probably because the world would go crazy if someone finally puts a price on personal data. Sucks if their business model isn't profitable with current legislation, but they aren't the first company something like that has happened to. And they're hardly a bastion of ethi…

> if I could pay to have the spying/data gathering turned off, like the Kindles offer with ads/no ads What makes you think that paying to disable ads also disables data gathering? Does Amazon say this?

No mate, it was just an example, an analogy. Although my Kindle works pretty well without internet connectivity. Much harder to do with a phone, kind of defeats the purpose.

Re: Why we're saying no to Google

#30
post #6

This sounds like 'I want money by being "not google" and thus people have to like me'. The linked website doesn't point to anything else but that they're allegedly planting trees for (an unknown percentage of the money collected by) showing ads to users. Which is nice, but if you want that I support tree planting initiatives explicitly (which I do), why don't you just encourage someone doing just that, maybe by point…

The ongoing attacks on Google are crazy to me. Google has done wonders for all of us - remember how terrible search engines used to be? Do you remember how terrible email was before Gmail? How awful MapQuest was before Google maps? In my opinion these attacks are a paid PR driven distraction from the truly evil actors in the world - see the losses of freedom for people in Hong Kong or citizens of Russia who been impr…

> remember how terrible search engines used to be?

Um, Altavista was better than Google for a very long time.

And I STILL cry that I can't search and then get a graphical clustermap in order to drill down to what I want. (Yeah, when I search for Python I'm probably not looking for reptiles).

Post reply on HN