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

Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 510 posts

Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

#291

Post by prepend »

tlb wrote: post #187
tmtvl wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * Identity providers who have lists of user IDs that belong to "high CTR" audiences (users more likely to click ads) > * Geo providers who tell the bidders where the User's location is so that they can target locally-focused advertisements to them > * User intent plugins, "abandoned cart" retargeting, product recommendation providers, etc. who look at user interaction events and build profiles of people who can be…

Geotargeting of ads is essential for local businesses. Banning it would make advertising only practical for national brands. It would be bad for the world if only national brands could advertise.

I live in a unique town name in the US, pretend it’s “Foo.”

I tried to buy ads for “Foo photography” as people in my town literally type that in. And my budget wasn’t enough to buy all instances of that search.

I didn’t need geotargeting for my local business.

Comically google kept trying to geotarget. Every time it did this I would get people all over the place who searched “photography” and a large percentage was burned. I kept trying to turn off geotargeting.

Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

#292

Post by ajross »

snozolli wrote: post #278
ajross wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only Google-integrated Android devices are profitable. You really think Graphene/Lineage/etc... devices have a chance in the market vs. Apple Computer ? Splitting off the integration means those devices have to pay for it or go without. Even Amazon failed in this space. Which is to say, the parts of Android that are "profitable" are the parts tied to the broader corporate product suite.

Only Google-integrated Android devices are profitable. I don't understand what you're trying to say. Pixel devices? Android devices being paid by Google to use Google's app store, browser, and default search engine? What does any of that have to do with whether or not Android is separated? You really think Graphene/Lineage/etc... devices have a chance in the market vs. Apple Computer? What does that have to do with w…

If the only way to sell a profitable product is to buy its core value-add (Google integration) from someone else, then your product isn't profitable by definition. Split off Android and Pixels become just another Fire Phone, and will compete just about as well (or worse, since the spun-off Android division wouldn't even have free Amazon integration).

Again, there are Google-free Android phones in the market today. They do very poorly.

Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

#293

Post by timewizard »

mystified5016 wrote: post #284
timewizard wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're acknowledging that the best way to make a population powerless and then rob them blind is Communism?

No, because we aren't even doing that the best way. Can't even fail successfully.

So real "capitalism devolved into communism" has never been tried before?

Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

#294

Post by whoknowsidont »

lupka wrote: post #119
whoknowsidont wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a documented example of this?

This is happening to me right now. I have run a site for 14 years that gets most of its traffic during the current two week stretch (it's related to NBA playoffs). All of a sudden, Adsense revenue has gone to basically zero. $90 of earnings from Sunday has even disappeared. There is no way to contact a real person at Google. You can just post in their dumb little forum and someone with no authority who doesn't even w…

You could just go to a different ad network? At that amount of money you're not on the ad exchange.

I don't see how this is ruining your business. A vendor is not playing well with you, just go to another one?

Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

#295

Post by whoknowsidont »

bdcravens wrote: post #186
whoknowsidont wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Revenue is not really a consideration when talking about _illegal_ monopolies. That is an incorrect way to view this. It's about anti-competitive practices. That's what the laws are about (and the reason for their existence). Google is not anti-competitive. At no point am I forced or even "guided" into doing business with Google, at any stage, in any department. There are 8 billion other ad-networks out there, and th…

> Internet Explorer was not free. You needed Windows. And if you had Windows you HAD IE, regardless of whether you wanted it or not, or even tried to remove it. Can you use Gmail, Google Drive, Chrome sync etc and opt out of allowing Google to use any of your data for advertising services?

I can in fact, go to a different mail provider, use a different file hosting and sharing service, and use different browsers with different sync technologies.

All of that I can do _for free_ with little to no hassle.

This was not the case with IE. You are not doing a fair comparison here, and it's bordering on dishonest.

Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

#296

Post by fallingknife »

azemetre wrote: post #259
fallingknife wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it's not democratic, but what business ever is? There is no recognized right to access the advertising market on terms that you like.

Yes there is no right to access an advertising market for Google, luckily the government agrees they are an illegal monopoly. Hopefully the ramifications are massive and company breaking.

If that happens this will do nothing for you. You will go through some other company where you can't talk to a human.

Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

#297

Post by whoknowsidont »

CPLX wrote: post #139
whoknowsidont wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Revenue is not really a consideration when talking about _illegal_ monopolies. That is an incorrect way to view this. It's about anti-competitive practices. That's what the laws are about (and the reason for their existence). Google is not anti-competitive. At no point am I forced or even "guided" into doing business with Google, at any stage, in any department. There are 8 billion other ad-networks out there, and th…

> Google is not anti-competitive. While you're welcome to this opinion you might want to address the fact that Google has recently lost THREE separate trials, each of which individually and separately produced a verdict that they are, in fact, in violation of laws against unfair competition.

You mean the three trials which are definitely not politically motivated, right?

Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

#298

Post by sidewndr46 »

dboreham wrote: post #285
sidewndr46 wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"useful to them" - do I really need to know how much one day dental implants cost in 2025?

They do them in one day now?

According to all these ads I keep seeing, yes.

Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

#299

Post by lupka »

whoknowsidont wrote: post #294
lupka wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is happening to me right now. I have run a site for 14 years that gets most of its traffic during the current two week stretch (it's related to NBA playoffs). All of a sudden, Adsense revenue has gone to basically zero. $90 of earnings from Sunday has even disappeared. There is no way to contact a real person at Google. You can just post in their dumb little forum and someone with no authority who doesn't even w…

You could just go to a different ad network? At that amount of money you're not on the ad exchange. I don't see how this is ruining your business. A vendor is not playing well with you, just go to another one?

The key factor is the timing. During the primary week where this product generates income, Google completely screwed me over with no warning and no answers about what's going on. I am of course looking into alternatives, but that takes time, and 3 days from now it'll be too late.

Re: Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

#300

Post by jackcosgrove »

dboreham wrote: post #288
Henchman21 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were really smart guys. But smart guys don’t stand a chance in the face of all that money because it attracts people who know how to manipulate and control smart people . Smart people think they’re at the top of the totem pole. But really its those without ethics who sit at the top in our society. This is a conundrum humanity must address if we’re to survive over the long term, IMO.

Psychopathopoly.

If there isn't a Voight-Kampff test for this there needs to be.
Post reply on HN