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

European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

europa.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 702 posts

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#401

Post by matt4077 »

jabv wrote: post #317
bjl wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once you gain a certain amount of market share you no longer have the right to engage in certain kinds of anti-competitive actions. There's nothing extreme about that; the laws have been in place for over a century.

"It is generally conceded in our age that a critically strategic producer has an obligation to the public for the sake of the common good." And what happens if Google says, "f * it, we're not providing a utility, we're not taking traffic from European IPs anymore"? I am no anarcho-capitalist, but I really think more folks should read Atlas Shrugged.

Then they'd be as stupid as some random Ayn Rand fan on the internet, and wouldn't be running Google.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#402

Post by mythz »

yellow_postit wrote: post #376
mythz wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can easily go to another website if you want results from a different vendor. If you're searching on Google you'd expect results curated from Google, if you can get better, more relevant results else where, everyone can easily do so. I also wouldn't expect any of my Desktop Apps to be laced with content or functionality from competitive products.

Applying this line of reasoning, do you disagree with the EU ruling about browser choice that Microsoft had to comply with?

What line of reasoning? I don't think irremovable Desktop Apps and Websites are comparable or that they should be sanctioned the same way.

It didn't have to be a ballot box but I think users should be able to decide what default browser they want to use on first use. I'd prefer to only be install what browsers I want to use.

IMO Microsoft is just as hostile now, I can't uninstall Edge from Windows 10, I keep getting nagged to use Edge as my default browser, my preferences to never ask again are not honored. my defaults are lost on each upgrade, despite setting my default browser to Chrome the Windows Search box still opens up results in bing with Edge, I need to use my spam hotmail account to log into Windows 10, I tried using a local account but it broke everywhere that launched a Sign Up page which crashed after 1s of an empty screen, which I needed in order to get the latest version of WSL with the bug fix I needed. In the end I had to reinstall Windows 10 and adopt their stupid Internet account policy. Windows 10 has been the most user hostile OS I've used that I'm planning on switching to using a Windows 2016 Server OS on my next install.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#403

Post by mythz »

watbe wrote: post #392
mythz wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you using Google then? Use a Service you can trust or you believe has your best interests at heart.

The answer to your question is given by the EC decision: > There are also high barriers to entry in these markets, in part because of network effects: the more consumers use a search engine, the more attractive it becomes to advertisers. The profits generated can then be used to attract even more consumers. Similarly, the data a search engine gathers about consumers can in turn be used to improve results. Simply put,…

Sounds like they're punishing commercial success, i.e. the goals of most public corporations.

Search has been Google's core competency since their inception, they were much smaller than the existing Search engines when they started out but were able to create a better product that users preferred and since that time they've been able to amass a wealth of knowledge, experience and resources. Of course any company is going to have a hard time trying to compete with them now, but I don't see why they need to be punished for executing so well on their core mission.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#404

Post by yellow_postit »

patrickaljord wrote: post #186
catdog wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't be so sure if they benefit. Not every Google service which is pushed upwards by their tight integration is top notch.Also the better ones may have room for improvement and innovation which we might not see from a monopoly in a comfortable position.

If they didn't benefit, if using those services were a net loss, then people wouldn't be using them. Also, I like to draw a line between monopolies imposed by force (eg taxi offering horrible services making competitors illegal through licensing) and those used by people voluntarily because they enjoy the services. Google is used voluntarily, because people enjoy it, like Microsoft during the 90's. As I read elsewher…

Don't underestimate how strong of a bias towards clicking comes from being at position 1 or having a richer looking UX.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#405

Post by matt4077 »

theBobBob wrote: post #72

The thing is, personally I prefer getting integrated results from Google's other search services when I do a Google search. I like getting Google Maps results when I search for a location, I like getting Google Flights results etc. When I do a Google search I am not just using it as a simple website search. I want it to use it to search the whole Google suite of services. If they are forced to stop doing this it will…

It was also more convenient to have Internet Explorer ship with Windows.

But it happened to be part of MS strategy to sideline other browsers, and gain enough power to become the de-facto standard. We got lucky and avoided that, but doing only what's most convenient at any given point in time can be harmful over the longer term. After all, Microsoft at that time tried to established their (patent-covered, binary-blob) .doc as the format for the web, instead of the open HTML.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#406

Post by yladiz »

justin66 wrote: post #306
yladiz wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Using Internet Explorer is 100% voloutary and there are alternatives. The US government should not interfere, its unnecessary and I think its an abuse of power from their side.

Hopefully you realize that a lot of people (in the US and elsewhere) actually felt that way, and that simply posting this does not constitute a very thoughtful rebuttal. The application of antitrust law (in the US and elsewhere) tends to be rather controversial. Which is why it's interesting...

I know, my implicit argument is that this specific argument isn't really valid because these circumstances have happened before and I don't believe the decision against Microsoft is controversial in 2017. I do believe that something like Google, while obviously having alternatives, is often the place people search, so it is in many ways a monopoly and should be heavily scrutinized to ensure it's not using its position for its own gain at the expense of its competitors. I don't know anyone who really uses Bing, and I only use DuckDuckGo because I don't prefer to be in the Google ecosystem, but I am not most people.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#407

Post by SmooL »

rizenfrmtheash wrote: post #400

I kind of want google to shut off all services for a week in EU countries. No search, images, maps, gmail, or android services. I wonder how quickly the eu will sober up.

Isn't that the exact type of situation we want to avoid though? A single corporation shouldn't be able to extort the whole EU...

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#408

Post by Kurtz79 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #146
Radle wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the articel? Google is not allowed to put itself or products from Alphabet higher in the search results than third party products. What kind of links they put up is googles decision. If they made a link "Shopping" next to "Maps" and "Images" everything would be fine. The problem is search results. Consumers expect all results to be shown fairly, by not doing so Google violated it's position. This is not…

Sure, but the question is, where the line will be drawn. A "Shopping" link next to "Maps" and "Images" is probably OK, but it's also completely useless. I'd be surprised if more than a fraction of people doing comparison shopping actually clicked that link. Intentionally pushing down results of competitors via algorithmic criteria is obviously bad, but say they stopped doing that. What about the inline shopping box a…

I think the line is drawn pretty clearly.

The point is not that their service was in prominent position, but it was done so that it appeared as natural result of the search.

It's somewhat like doing a search in a search engine and being shown paid results on top, without any indication that they are paid.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#409

Post by matt4077 »

interfixus wrote: post #49

Please enlighten me: What kind of monopoly would that be? Much as I detest an awful lot of Google, I have never once been - and know of noone else who has ever been - forced to use their search against my will. In fact, I get along fine without it, as well as without their analytics and their browser and their cloud stuff, excepting of course that I am often forced to correspond with gmail addresses.

That you're somewhat free to switch doesn't actually matter. But if it did, I'd point out that Google's customers are advertisers, and they do not have the freedom to switch easily, considering they are forced to go wherever their customers are.

Re: European Commission fines Google €2.42B for abusing dominance

#410

Post by matt4077 »

patrickaljord wrote: post #103

I wonder if that's payback for the US gov fining VW so hard: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2017/04/21/volkswa... It's almost the same amount, US$2.8B. It's like the EU telling the US "F with our corporations and we'll F with yours".

These things really don't work at the emotional, nationalistic level that people often ascribe to them.

I'm not going to find it again, but if you check the list of the largest cartel penalties imposed by the EU, 9 of the top 10 are European companies (plus one asian, I believe).

Post reply on HN