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

Google says it doesn't monopolize digital ad market – senators don't buy it

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 229 posts

Re: Google says it doesn't monopolize digital ad market – senators don't buy it

#21

Post by return1 »

ricardo81 wrote: post #12

The UK recently evaluated the online ad market and found that Google and Facebook commanded 70% of all online ad spend in the country [0]. Their large pool of advertisers also helps them command a higher return per search compared to other platforms, allowing them to outbid its peers to become the default search choice on devices, e.g. Apple products. Their lack of privacy sensitive policy also helps their ad targeti…

The only way to have competition is if FB started a search engine or if google bought instagram

Re: Google says it doesn't monopolize digital ad market – senators don't buy it

#22

Post by HatchedLake721 »

mondoshawan wrote: post #16
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most of those senators are not the holders of truth when it comes to technology They don’t have to be. Their staffers do. I’ve worked with a number of staffers on these questions for about three years now. They’re some of the smartest people I’ve worked with in my career, which has centred around Wall Street and Silicon Valley.

So why aren't they the senators instead of the morons they back?

Because being smart is not a golden ticket or the only quality required to become a senator/politician.

Re: Google says it doesn't monopolize digital ad market – senators don't buy it

#23

Post by mrpickels »

yaacov wrote: post #11
02020202 wrote: post #3

If gulag says it, then it must be true.

I work at google. My grandfather spent a couple years in a Gulag. We both got free food at work, but I’m allowed to leave at the end of the day, and my job is writing code instead of counting dead people.

You are working in a company that is using the smartest people to optimize the ad conversion funnel to sell to people some useless bullshit. At least your grandfather saw the result of his work.

Re: Google says it doesn't monopolize digital ad market – senators don't buy it

#24

Post by actuator »

curiousgal wrote: post #6

Same senators who thought Google made iPhones? Not defending Google but I am saying that most of those senators are not the holders of truth when it comes to technology.

I don't understand the issue completely, so the case may have merit but it's not like the current admin doesn't have an axe to grind with them. Might be just electioneering antics but look at this tweet: https://twitter.com/EricTrump/status/1303288007357796353

Re: Google says it doesn't monopolize digital ad market – senators don't buy it

#25

Post by [deleted] »

return1 wrote: post #21
ricardo81 wrote: post #12

The UK recently evaluated the online ad market and found that Google and Facebook commanded 70% of all online ad spend in the country [0]. Their large pool of advertisers also helps them command a higher return per search compared to other platforms, allowing them to outbid its peers to become the default search choice on devices, e.g. Apple products. Their lack of privacy sensitive policy also helps their ad targeti…

The only way to have competition is if FB started a search engine or if google bought instagram

[deleted]

Re: Google says it doesn't monopolize digital ad market – senators don't buy it

#26

Post by mhh__ »

mondoshawan wrote: post #16
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most of those senators are not the holders of truth when it comes to technology They don’t have to be. Their staffers do. I’ve worked with a number of staffers on these questions for about three years now. They’re some of the smartest people I’ve worked with in my career, which has centred around Wall Street and Silicon Valley.

So why aren't they the senators instead of the morons they back?

You need to be a certain type of animal to be a successful politician. Especially in the US where the power per person in the senate especially is enormous.

The house of commons has 600 more MPs for 5x less population.

Re: Google says it doesn't monopolize digital ad market – senators don't buy it

#27

Post by mhh__ »

qaq wrote: post #18
mondoshawan wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why aren't they the senators instead of the morons they back?

would people actually vote for them?

Combining brains and charisma is very rare in a politician. Obama being the textbook example - senior law school lecturer but also has the emotional depth and natural charm.

Re: Google says it doesn't monopolize digital ad market – senators don't buy it

#29

Post by Broken_Hippo »

mondoshawan wrote: post #16
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most of those senators are not the holders of truth when it comes to technology They don’t have to be. Their staffers do. I’ve worked with a number of staffers on these questions for about three years now. They’re some of the smartest people I’ve worked with in my career, which has centred around Wall Street and Silicon Valley.

So why aren't they the senators instead of the morons they back?

Because a senator should know how to listen to others. They cannot be an expert on everything. Heck, these folks are making rules about medicine, pollution, car safety, tech issues, teaching, school lunches, interstate highways, commerce, military, child toy standards, what sorts of meat to allow in, and lots of other things I can't think up off of the top of my head. No one can be an expert on all of them - why we would suddenly expect them all to be an expert on this is beyond me. IIRC, an education in law is pretty common, which would be expected.

(I know the system isn't perfect and not everyone listens to educated voices and in a perfect world, there would be a range of knowledge in the elected body itself).

Edited for a missed comma.

Re: Google says it doesn't monopolize digital ad market – senators don't buy it

#30

Post by adrianN »

deepstack wrote: post #8

The internet the way is currently design will resulted in centralisation and end up with monopoly or oligopoly.

Any system in which network effects and winner-takes-all exist result in centralization and monopoly. I don't think you could design the Internet differently to avoid this.
Post reply on HN