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

311–320 of 524 posts

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

#311

Post by nox101 »

InsideOutSanta wrote: post #162
shadowgovt wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an interesting hypothesis, but it's entirely possible that separated from Google, Chrome is either not a viable business model (browsers don't make money on their own) or is incentivized to get into bed with some other ad company to make money, to effectively the same result.

Aren't you pointing out the exact problem with Google? If Chrome wasn't a viable business without Google's ads subsidizing it, isn't its existence in its current form exactly the kind of anti-competitive outcome we would be better off without? Without Google subsidizing Chrome, a real competitive market for browsers might emerge, with more vendors investing more effort into competing for users, without having to comp…

> Without Google subsidizing Chrome, a real competitive market for browsers might emerge

Without Chrome there will be only be Safari and Edge

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

#312

Post by summerlight »

The problem of so-called "break-up" option is that there are not many buyers who can afford operating those services (those costs at least billions every year even if those could be purchased for free) and those who can afford are already serious monopolists. Imagine MS buying Chrome, Meta buying AdWords, Apple buying Android etc etc. You probably don't want that.

Other feasible way to avoid this would be keeping Google ads to subsidize them, but then what's the point of change? This is why the remedy should touch very specific illegal practices. Structural changes need proper legislation which targets the entire market. Otherwise, you'll just see balloon effects in action.

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

#313

Post by zamadatix »

nox101 wrote: post #309
mcpar-land wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Breaking up their individual businesses can cause each business to have incentives that line up better with their customers / users. Example: if Chrome was separated from Google, they won't have as much of an incentive to push back against adblockers with things like Manifest V3. Or include APIs that are only available to google websites (Which it has! https://x.com/lcasdev/status/1810696257137959018 )

Users are not Chrome's customers. Even if Chrome is separated into a separate company that would still be true. Users are unlikely to pay for a browser when every OS comes with a free one. Some companies that want to be the default search (unless the gov bans that) or, some companies that want to be the default new tab page, would likely be the actual customers An exception might be Chromebook users. It's not clear h…

Right now the main paying user of Chrome is Google as a tool to deliver product integrations and guarantee browser based ad delivery. It's just that all of that is seen as internal expense in developing Chrome instead of an external source of revenue from Chrome. If Chrome were split off the main paying user of Chrome would probably be large enterprises and educational institutions - that'd be a massive change.

I'm not sure it'd really make sense to split Chrome off on its own or not though. Maybe Chrome/ChromeOS/Android as a base software platform for consumers, businesses, and schools.

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

#314

Post by skeaker »

wil421 wrote: post #237
isodev wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Why should they have to allow it? My smart TVs and video game consoles never allowed it, except that short lived Linux PlayStation. Nintendo is pretty hostile about reverse engineering the switch.

Those should allow it too. Them setting a bad precedent doesn't mean we should continue to abide by it, just that there's more work to be done undoing it.

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

#315

Post by spankalee »

mcpar-land wrote: post #65
fny wrote: post #31

I'm very curious to see what a breakup looks like. Past breakups involved "uniform" businesses: - American Tobacco: Commodity - Standard Oil: Commodity - AT&T: Utility - Northern Securities: Railroads - Swift & Co: Meatpacking - Kodak: Film - Paramount: Movie Theaters Google is more of a synergistic conglomerate. How would spinning off an individual business like Chrome, Android, or AdWords reduce their respective do…

Breaking up their individual businesses can cause each business to have incentives that line up better with their customers / users. Example: if Chrome was separated from Google, they won't have as much of an incentive to push back against adblockers with things like Manifest V3. Or include APIs that are only available to google websites (Which it has! https://x.com/lcasdev/status/1810696257137959018 )

Manifest v3 exists to increase security and privacy, not to break ad blockers. I suspect that an independent Chrome would implement it even faster because they don't have to worry about the perception that they're doing it for ads.

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

#316

Post by 8note »

soared wrote: post #8
retskrad wrote: post #4

1. Forbid Google from paying Apple and Android OEM’s to be the default search engine. Also, detach Google search from Android and forbid Google from forcing it to be included on every Android phone. 2. Give Google search competitors access to Google’s search data so these new AI search engine companies can compete. Without these huge amounts of data, they have no chance. Done!

2 is not how the US breaks up monopolies

The US can split the crawler yesterday into its own business though, which could sell access to that index and the execute training operations over it

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

#317

Post by ffgtedggf »

dekhn wrote: post #310
epolanski wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub isn't making me use Azure, Azure isn't making me use Office, Teams isn't making me use Bing. See the point here? All of Google pieces are a giant machine to collude in the same direction: their ad engine.

How does Google Cloud (I mean GCP, not Workspace) fit in to that idea? It's not particularly bundled to the ad engine.

Bad counter example. Have you tried using Google ads or analytics without using BigQuery? What about server containers (not the type of containers in the docker sense you’re thinking of)? The data exfil costs for anything else tie you to gcp.

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

#319

Post by tyree731 »

Someone wrote: post #176
elforce002 wrote: post #160

While we're at it, we need to break Microsoft and Amazon asap. I don't know how Microsoft is not up for discussion when it's a behemoth (GitHub, LinkedIn, Azure, Windows, Office, etc.). The same applies for Amazon.

> I don't know how Microsoft is not up for discussion when it's a behemoth Because we think interfering with the free market is necessary when a company misuses market power, not solely when it is a behemoth.

But Microsoft has misused their market power plenty of times, such as when they bundled Microsoft Teams with their enterprise contract at zero cost, destroying Slack's market value overnight.

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

#320

Post by layer8 »

The root of all the “evil” here is ads. I have no particular solutions to suggest — though banning paid ads altogether sounds like a worthwhile idea, apart from the definitional difficulties — but I believe that’s the aspect that needs to be tackled one way or the other.
Post reply on HN