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

Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 352 posts

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#341

Post by acdha »

paulsutter wrote: post #237
acdha wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I'm definitely not saying Google isn't doing important work. I just think this highlights the key role government funding plays in ensuring that businesses don't have to pay for all of that basic research and training. That's basically the answer to that question: Google isn't risking their core business on this because so much of the foundation has been set. If, say, in 2003 they'd gone to investors and asked…

Yeah so awesome that the whole world can coast to success now that DARPA derisked the future.

“derisked” is [willful?] misrepresentation. This isn't a hard argument: board early research requires a lot of speculative work which doesn't pan out for everything which does, not to mention tons of basic training and equipment investment. Companies have a hard time justifying that and, unsurprisingly, the record shows they largely don't. Government funding operates with different incentives and timescales and has a lengthy track record of success getting ideas to the point where companies are willing to foot the remaining development costs.

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#342

Post by skookumchuck »

acdha wrote: post #340
skookumchuck wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My argument is with the notion that if government didn't fund X, X never would have happened. The existence of the internet is the epitome of this kind of thinking. It's like saying if someone paid by the government had an idea to connect two towns with a road, therefore nobody would have ever had such an idea otherwise. This fallacious reason is obviously false, as FidoNET proves, but that doesn't deter the notion.…

It's not a claim that things would never happen but that it'd take much longer. Yes, private investment exists but it's so much smaller — MIT is legendary, one of the top schools in the world, has a full-time development office getting donations, etc. but the bulk of their research is federal by a large margin. I note that you dismiss the foundational technologies of the last century as cherry-picking but fail to pre…

> but it's so much smaller

Right, because there's much less point to private investment if you can get the government to foot the bill instead.

> Do you have any sources

The technologies I mentioned are well documented. Are you not aware of FidoNET?

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#343

Post by ocdtrekkie »

sangnoir wrote: post #315
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm glad you bring up the Kindle: The Fire Phone failed, as I pointed out, because you can't succeed on Android without Google Play. Funny enough, it was rumored their next attempt will support Google Play. And since Google's MADA prohibits manufacturers from selling forks, it means Amazon would also have to give up the Kindle Fire. So Amazon is soon to be another example of how you can't fight Google. If you'd like…

> And since Google's MADA prohibits manufacturers from selling forks, it means Amazon would also have to give up the Kindle Fire. So Amazon is soon to be another example of how you can't fight Google. This is wrong. The anti-forking clause applies to Open Handset Alliance members only: a group which Amazon does not belong to.

Actually, you are wrong, it's a requirement of the MADA contract, and you can see an example here: http://www.benedelman.org/docs/htc-mada.pdf

"Company shall not... take any actions that may cause or result in the fragmentation of Android, including but not limited to the distribution by Company of a software development kit (SDK) derived from Android or derived from Android Compatible Devices..."

Please don't claim people are wrong without any evidence, especially when the evidence that exists disagrees with you. ;)

Also, while the Open Handset Alliance page is no longer updated, OHA members are the companies who have signed the MADA. The OHA is a thinly veiled cartel for Google to exert control over the industry. If Amazon releases a Play Store-supported phone, they'll have to kill the Kindle Fire line... or make them Google Play-included Android devices... which would mean being forced to include a competing eBook store, Play Books, on Kindle devices.

This is the very definition of illegal tying, and hopefully the US government will finally take note.

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#344

Post by mgkimsal »

hammock wrote: post #30
mgkimsal wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yellow page publishers don't actually know the details of my orders.

Indirectly they do because the more orders you make through yellow pages, the more a pizza place will pay to be listed Also are you complaining that Amazon will be able to order the options it gives you based on your personal preference?

"...are you complaining that Amazon..."

No. You asked "How is that different from a yellow pages?"

That's a pretty big difference, imo.

" the more orders you make through yellow pages, the more a pizza place will pay to be listed".

Huh? They might pay that, if they feel they're getting a good return, and/or to block a competitor from a particular page/size/etc. But they don't automatically pay more the more pizzas they sell to people who found them in the YP.

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#345

Post by Bakary »

paglia_s wrote: post #126
Asdfbla wrote: post #88

I'm surprised the EU hasn't acted against Google already. Remember when they (rightfully) went after Microsoft and forced them to offer a browser choice? And that wasn't even the peak of the Internet Explorer monopoly. And yet it's allowed that like 80% smartphones sold in Europe come with Android versions that basically lock the user into the Google ecosystem, else you can't use the default store.

It looks like a multibilion fine for Google is coming http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/google-eu-fi...

As usual it will be pocket change for the company, and essentially part of the cost of doing business.

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#346

Post by known »

jondubois wrote: post #14

I agree they should be regulated. The world is a better place with lots of smaller companies. These big companies turn regular people into corporate livestock to serve the wealthy. If you were to analyze Facebook as if it were a country, the wealth gap among employees would be atrocious - The top 1% would own maybe 99% of the wealth of the country and everyone else would earn a minuscule fraction of the total value t…

Govt should regulate market capitalization of corporations;

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#347

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

jacquesm wrote: post #332
ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is not to excuse Microsoft's past behavior. The point is the common "Microsoft is the most villainous tech company that ever existed and ever will exist!" meme among older techies is basically ignoring the fact that, once a company gets to that size, nobody's hands are clean, even good old "Don't be evil" Google. To constantly repeat that meme is to demonstrate that one is living in the past instead of faci…

I did not say anything about Amazon, Google, Apple or other companies because those were not the subject. Note the 'not many' in the comment you replied to. The fact that other companies are bad does nothing to diminish what MS did (and I haven't seen Google finance a lawsuit against Linux yet, for one thing). The reality of the present is that Microsoft is still at it with their telemetry, forced upgrades and piggy…

> The fact that other companies are bad does nothing to diminish what MS did (and I haven't seen Google finance a lawsuit against Linux yet, for one thing).

Well, let's revise your original words to take that into account: "Not many companies have such a sordid history of unfair competition as Microsoft does, merely almost all of the ones of the same size and influence."

Rather takes a lot of the rhetorical weight out of it, doesn't it?

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#349

Post by oneshot908 »

kyrra wrote: post #239
oneshot908 wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO breaking up Google or Amazon makes as much sense as breaking up a tumor in the body without removing any of its cells and declaring victory. Go ahead, make some arbitrary cuts between Amazon, Lab 126 and AWS. Or go split Google into Android, Search and Cloud. That's a huge buying opportunity in both cases IMO. But if you really want to talk about a current monopoly in the valley, look no further than NVIDIA's 100…

> look no further than NVIDIA's 100% ownership of the DL/ML processor space. [Disclaimer: I work for Google, opinions are my own] Google has their TPU that they are letting others use via Cloud services[0]. It may not be the same as buying hardware, but they are giving Nvidia a run for their money. https://cloud.google.com/tpu/

I would love it if you licensed this technology to the other cloud providers. IMO it would be an awesome embrace and extend play both in terms of HW and in making TensorFlow faster than its competing frameworks.

Otherwise, you guys seem locked in an expensive Red Queen's Race with NVIDIA's 1000+ engineer HW team.

Re: Are Google, Amazon and others getting too big?

#350

Post by crowbahr »

joshuamorton wrote: post #206
0x737368 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you need to consider the amount of data Google is amassing from people using solely their services. And then sells that data to advertisers. If this trend continues eventually they'd be able to know more about you than even the closest of your friends. Is this really such a great price to pay for your privacy? For it to be easier to look up your friend's phone number from your email list?

I'm just curious, what data do you believe google gives to advertisers? I work at google, and I see this trope on HN a lot, and I always like to see what data people think is given away, since a lot of the time they seem to be under the impression that either Google's privacy policy is different than it actually is, or that Google's privacy policy isn't actually something that Google follows, or that it doesn't prote…

I agree with you: There is a misunderstanding here.

Google obviously gives no data to advertisers... they sell targeted ads. The difference is vast. As an advertiser I would purchase an ad targeted at 20-something male video game players, for example. I would not get to read their emails to get better insight into their minds or anything insane like that.

And if that started happening at Google they'd die, and they know it.

Post reply on HN