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

Google has added ads on both its search page and Chrome://newtab

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 330 posts

Re: Google has added ads on both its search page and Chrome://newtab

#231

Post by tfsh »

null_object wrote: post #185
tfsh wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safaris default new tab page is the Apple store and most don't know how to change that. edit: turns out I was wrong. 2nd edit: this used to be the case many years ago, thanks for those who confirmed

> 2nd edit: this used to be the case many years ago, thanks for those who confirmed No - what other posters 'confirmed' is that www.apple.com was one of the choices that could be made for a new tab or homepage - absolutely not the Apple store as you said. Worth correcting yet again because of what's become a knee-jerk 'but whatabout Apple?' in comment threads about Google on HN.

I'd say they are analogous. If I go to apple.com it is the definition of an online store, there are a number of call to action "buy" buttons with pictures of various Apple devices.

I think you're being pedantic if you say apple.com is not the apple store. If I wanted to go to the apple store I'd go to apple.com.

Re: Google has added ads on both its search page and Chrome://newtab

#232

Post by noodles_nomore »

beej71 wrote: post #203
chatterhead wrote: post #117

The internet doesn't work without advertising. Almost as if the money to build all this infrastructure has to come from somewhere. If only we could create a digital token that would be in such demand it would generate its own network and infrastructure effect. Oh wait... they ruined that, too.

In the good old days, the money came from your job. And you used that money to create free content out of the kindness of your heart.

This stopped working when people realized that they can replace giving kindness with taking money and quit their jobs.

Re: Google has added ads on both its search page and Chrome://newtab

#233

Post by marcus_holmes »

TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #160
JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do we fix this loop in companies? It is a very serious problem for humanity’s future. It exists in government too. How do we reward long-term thinking and decisions?

A lot of the most egregious, society-warping behavior by monstrous-sized companies is due to paying execs with stock. It was a salary tax avoidance maneuver that started in the 80's, and has led to 1) absolute fixation on short-term stock price, and 2) (also to that end) stock buybacks. Many of our largest corporations have used recent stimulus moneys to fund buybacks like it was sex or something. All it has been is…

This has also completely messed with startup stock options. Because large companies used options to award execs with tax-free incentives, and the tax authorities didn't like that, we now have to pay tax on the options when we get them rather than on the capital gains we actually make. And it doesn't solve the problem - execs get paid some other way and options are still fubar'd

Re: Google has added ads on both its search page and Chrome://newtab

#234

Post by karaterobot »

vorpalhex wrote: post #209
criley2 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a classic example of how propaganda works. The layman's definition of recession, which has never been used officially or by policy-makers in America, is this bit about "negative GDP growth for two quarters". But despite that not being how we've always determined recessions here, if you read the reply above, the user has literally invented a political conspiracy about their ignorance about economics. The layma…

Your own wikipedia link references the standard - the standard used by the media and the traders that it's two quarters of negative GDP. NBER does tend to be considered the official source.. and they tend to announce them about a year after they happen. NBER is important but "determiner of recession" is not quite their job role. You need only to glance at the markets to see the reality of the situation we are in. The…

Be fair: the link references the standard, but does so in order to say that that's not how the NBER defines a recession.

> The NBER uses a broader definition of a recession than commonly appears in the media. A definition of a recession commonly used in the media is two consecutive quarters of a shrinking gross domestic product (GDP). In contrast, the NBER defines a recession as "a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales". Business cycle dates are determined by the NBER dating committee. Typically, these dates correspond to peaks and troughs in real GDP, although not always so.

...

> Though not listed by the NBER, another factor in favor of this alternate definition is that a long term economic contraction may not always have two consecutive quarters of negative growth, as was the case in the recession following the bursting of the dot-com bubble.

Re: Google has added ads on both its search page and Chrome://newtab

#235

Post by genshii »

thrown_22 wrote: post #225
skrowl wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really a matter of opinion or what people think. We're already in a recession here in the United States, as we've had two negative GDP growth quarters in a row. Anyone who says otherwise is likely just doing so for political reasons, as it's also an election year here in the United States, but to do so they'd have to literally change the definition of recession (they're trying but it's not working).

[flagged]

Care to elaborate?

Re: Google has added ads on both its search page and Chrome://newtab

#236

Post by BiteCode_dev »

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #112
marcus_holmes wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say you're a decision-maker at Google (or Any Large Corp). You have a KPI to increase revenue by 5% this year. If you hit this KPI, then you get a bonus. If you get the bonus, then you can afford the thing that your partner has been wanting forever (or that will make your neighbours jealous, or whatever), and you get a happy life. You know that doing X will harm the company in the long term (defined as anything past…

How do we fix this loop in companies? It is a very serious problem for humanity’s future. It exists in government too. How do we reward long-term thinking and decisions?

Nature solved it for us: obsolete things die and are replaced by better, new things. Google dying is not a bad thing, it's how it's supposed to work. Same for countries, religions, and so on. On a different scale.

Re: Google has added ads on both its search page and Chrome://newtab

#237

Post by TobyTheDog123 »

fullshark wrote: post #224
criley2 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a classic example of how propaganda works. The layman's definition of recession, which has never been used officially or by policy-makers in America, is this bit about "negative GDP growth for two quarters". But despite that not being how we've always determined recessions here, if you read the reply above, the user has literally invented a political conspiracy about their ignorance about economics. The layma…

Or maybe THIS is exactly how propaganda works, swapping between the connotations and denotations of words when it's politically convenient to. It's also clear to me if the president had an R next to his name, both sides of the "Are we in a recession?" debate would swap entirely.

"Accuse your enemy of that which you are guilty of"

Re: Google has added ads on both its search page and Chrome://newtab

#238

Post by somenameforme »

ren_engineer wrote: post #200
huijzer wrote: post #177

> Google has historically been protective of their front page, why now? Probably for the same reason that Google is shutting down Stadia [1] and cutting staff [2], and the same reason that we see roughly one announcement of layoffs here on Hacker News every week: most people expect that we are going into a recession. For example, see the price of major indexes like the S&P 500 or the NASDAQ and plot it on a 10+ year…

>most people expect that we are going into a recession by the standard definition we are already in one, odds are we are actually going to enter a global depression and probably one worse than 2008

If even a fraction of what many are predicting comes to transpire over the next few months, then you can likely change 2008 to 1929.

Re: Google has added ads on both its search page and Chrome://newtab

#239

Post by chatterhead »

beej71 wrote: post #203
chatterhead wrote: post #117

The internet doesn't work without advertising. Almost as if the money to build all this infrastructure has to come from somewhere. If only we could create a digital token that would be in such demand it would generate its own network and infrastructure effect. Oh wait... they ruined that, too.

In the good old days, the money came from your job. And you used that money to create free content out of the kindness of your heart.

In the good ol'days when profit drove value not perceived market dominance based on shoddy short-term user data created by a generation of graphic designers.

Re: Google has added ads on both its search page and Chrome://newtab

#240

Post by marcus_holmes »

MarkPNeyer wrote: post #138
marcus_holmes wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say you're a decision-maker at Google (or Any Large Corp). You have a KPI to increase revenue by 5% this year. If you hit this KPI, then you get a bonus. If you get the bonus, then you can afford the thing that your partner has been wanting forever (or that will make your neighbours jealous, or whatever), and you get a happy life. You know that doing X will harm the company in the long term (defined as anything past…

Why do you care if you harm the company long term? It’s not like you are tied to it’s performance forever. When equity and labor markets are liquid, why wouldn’t you make decisions that help you now, and cause long term hurt something you have no long term stake in? If you don’t, your peers will.

Because as an executive officer of a company, I am supposed to have the shareholder's interests as my main priority.

I totally get your point, and I understand the "me first!" attitude that it comes from. But we can't have nice things if everyone does this.

Post reply on HN