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

Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 524 posts

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#281

Post by Cyph0n »

labcomputer wrote: post #258
Cyph0n wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But those are gaming and entertainment devices, not general-purpose computing devices that everyone relies on for day-to-day work and life. A good way to think about it is this: if Windows was as closed down as iOS, and took a 30% cut on every application purchase, would regulators have intervened?

What physical attributes make them not general purpose computers?

What physical attributes make a smart fridge not a general purpose computer? Or a car’s infotainment system? Or a Bluray disc player?

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#282

Post by jszymborski »

aembleton wrote: post #248
jszymborski wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public companies exist to enrich shareholders. If you are in a position to abuse your market power, you're sorta obligated to.

But doing so increases risk from regulators

I think if you can get as big as Google, Apple, or Microsoft without being broken up, companies haven't much to worry about.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#284

Post by danaris »

extraduder_ire wrote: post #267
sensanaty wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In these types of discussions, people love bringing out the "But what about $OTHER_OBVIOUS_MONOPOLY?". The solution is simple (the word simple here is doing a lot of work, I know); Meta, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Apple and any other similarly sized behemoth should be nuked, and not just in the tech world. Microsoft should've been properly nuked 30 years ago with the original anti-trust, yet alone now, same goes for…

Amazon is a funny example to imagine being broken up, since they famously try to isolate their business units from each other and keep them self-sustaining income wise. It might kill or dramatically change some business units like twitch, or IMDB though.

That's the point.

They use the money from their cash-cow businesses to artificially prop up their other lines of business, insulating them from having to actually compete on an even footing.

That's textbook abuse of monopoly (or market-dominant) position.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#285

Post by shadowgovt »

aembleton wrote: post #246
nolist_policy wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Show me how AdGuard or ublock origin abused the current system in v2 They didn't, but other malicious extensions did.

In that case, it should be a permission thing that a user can switch on for certain extensions.

It currently is, and it's easy to trick users into switching it on.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#286

Post by danaris »

rch wrote: post #207
bearjaws wrote: post #30

If what comes after is not better, then we waited too long to break this monopoly up. We either start ripping this band-aids off or we will just continually have a worse and worse internet.

Break them all up simultaneously or find a better approach. My perception is that there are too many politicians trying to pick winners for their own benefit.

The system is very fundamentally not designed to support such an approach (much as I agree that it would produce a better result).

The way to break up companies is to win antitrust lawsuits against them. Except in cases where the companies are actually tied together in some meaningful way (ie, they're not fully separate companies in practice), there's no way to link such suits to each other; each one has to stand or fall on its own merits, and on its own timetable.

I think it would be hard to argue that Google, Apple, Microsoft, etc are actually arms of the same company. Thus, each of these Big Tech antitrust suits needs to happen separately, and some of the remedies might end up combining in counterproductive ways, because they are generally not able to consider each other's situations (the remedies have to be based on the facts of the individual case, AIUI).

It sucks, but it's the only antitrust system we've got right now.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#287

Post by daft_pink »

tantalor wrote: post #198
daft_pink wrote: post #194

It’s true. If you look at the history, breaking up companies often results in each division doing well and maybe not an improvement as Youtube/Android/Search/Gmail/Adwords/Chrome all need to earn a profit independently. At a minimum, not having Google paying Firefox/Apple to promote them as the default is a good thing. It’s super annoying that Safari doesn’t allow me to switch to Kagi easily. I understand a reason th…

> super annoying that Safari doesn’t allow me to switch to Kagi What does Apple not allowing you to set a custom search engine on iOS have to do with Google?

Google pays Apple $20 billion per year to be the default search engine. I assume they either have some say or Apple want to increase the value in paying or the other search engines pay to be listed or there is some reason why safari doesn’t allow any search engines beyond a very short list. I doubt it’s an accident that you only get about 5 choices where google is the only decent choice

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#288

Post by xtracto »

marcosdumay wrote: post #181
Workaccount2 wrote: post #151

I'm flumuxed that Google is the first tech company to be ruled a monopoly. I would put them fourth on the tech monopoly list, behind Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, in that order. I don't think there would be much benefit to society by breaking up google. Whereas I do think there would be great benefit to breaking up Apple or MS.

> I'm flumuxed that Google is the first tech company to be ruled a monopoly. Hum... I'm sure you've heard about that famous one called AT&T. Or Microsoft a decade later.

If the US government didn't have the muscle to break up Microsoft, which had a pretty evident monopoly in the 90s, I am willing to bet they won't manage to put a dent to Google.

Particularly given how more "friendlier" has turned for corporations in the last 30 years.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#289

Post by amatheus »

isodev wrote: post #142
brookst wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While true and a fair point, iOS is Apple’s platform in a way that the web is most certainly not Google’s.

Just following this thought then the remedy will be forcing Apple to allow alternative OS and firmware on their devices, allowing consumers to choose what they do with the device hardware they purchased?

I think that would be the right decision, to me that makes more sense than forcing Apple to allow any app to be installed on iOS or allowing alternate stores.

Re: Google is a monopoly – the fix isn't obvious

#290

Post by tantalor »

daft_pink wrote: post #287
tantalor wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> super annoying that Safari doesn’t allow me to switch to Kagi What does Apple not allowing you to set a custom search engine on iOS have to do with Google?

Google pays Apple $20 billion per year to be the default search engine. I assume they either have some say or Apple want to increase the value in paying or the other search engines pay to be listed or there is some reason why safari doesn’t allow any search engines beyond a very short list. I doubt it’s an accident that you only get about 5 choices where google is the only decent choice

Those all sound like complaints the government could take up with Apple, not Google.
Post reply on HN