United States vs. Google • Hacker News Board

Re: United States vs. Google

#61

Post by pupdogg » Wed, Oct 21, 2020, 4:20 PM UTC

VikingCoder wrote: post #51

dsabanin wrote: post #47

I think Google is the best search engine. I don't have a problem with that. I do have a problem with them being the best search engine, top online ad platform and a developer of the top mobile OS, top video streaming service, top internet browser, top mapping/navigation service, among other things, at the SAME time. Their assets give them undue and unsupervised influence over a very big chunk of what's happening onli…

1) best search engine 2) top online ad platform 3) top mobile OS 4) top video streaming service 5) top internet browser 6) top mapping/navigation service Okay, you listed 6. What should the law say is the new limit for how many they should be able to have?

Law’s official motto is also “In God We Trust”, can you define God?

Re: United States vs. Google

#62

Post by residentfoam » Wed, Oct 21, 2020, 4:20 PM UTC

If I were the US authorities, I'd start asking/demanding Google to stop SSO across Search/GMail/Browser.

Just because I am a GMail user does not automatically mean that you can trace all my web search.

In addition, I'd demand removing Captcha-alike when using VPN services, to avoid them from tracking my IP.

I mean, even if you are not logged-in, they can still correlate IPs across products.

Re: United States vs. Google

#63

Post by zepto » Wed, Oct 21, 2020, 4:20 PM UTC

aloisdg wrote: post #55

VikingCoder wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) best search engine 2) top online ad platform 3) top mobile OS 4) top video streaming service 5) top internet browser 6) top mapping/navigation service Okay, you listed 6. What should the law say is the new limit for how many they should be able to have?

Lets say 1.

The divisions are arbitrary.

A search engine is a number of components - e.g. a crawler, an index, and a user interface.

Why should one company be able to own all three of these? Why not just one? Perhaps crawling should only be able to be sold as a wholesale commodity.

Re: United States vs. Google

#64

Post by enumjorge » Wed, Oct 21, 2020, 4:21 PM UTC

yaacov wrote: post #44

Side point, but > This, in turn, leads Google’s suppliers to work to make Google better — what is SEO but a collective effort by basically the entire Internet to ensure that Google’s search engine is as good as possible? Feels pretty confused to me. IMO, crappy sites with good SEO make Google worse for lots of queries.

Yeah like the way Pinterest’s takeover of Google image results was an effort to make the search engine as good as possible /s

Re: United States vs. Google

#65

Post by artingent » Wed, Oct 21, 2020, 4:21 PM UTC

VikingCoder wrote: post #51

dsabanin wrote: post #47

I think Google is the best search engine. I don't have a problem with that. I do have a problem with them being the best search engine, top online ad platform and a developer of the top mobile OS, top video streaming service, top internet browser, top mapping/navigation service, among other things, at the SAME time. Their assets give them undue and unsupervised influence over a very big chunk of what's happening onli…

1) best search engine 2) top online ad platform 3) top mobile OS 4) top video streaming service 5) top internet browser 6) top mapping/navigation service Okay, you listed 6. What should the law say is the new limit for how many they should be able to have?

One is plenty. Especially if "OS" is in the list. Microsoft in the 90s, and Apple and Google today have all used their OS supremacy to quash competition... quite often in extremely questionable ways.

Re: United States vs. Google

#66

Post by nocman » Wed, Oct 21, 2020, 4:21 PM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #36

nocman wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's like there's something inherently satisfying when the big guy gets knocked down, the idea that being big is bad in and of itself. It is surely true that some people see it that way, but I think most people would be fine with Google being gigantic if they perceived the company and it's services as being strictly beneficial for everyone. If there were no concerns about abuse of power, loss of privacy, squashing…

We need to be aware of our own bubbles when talking about how "most people" feel. I think most tech aware people are wary of Google, at best. I think most people people don't care. They use Google to search things every day and it seems to work for them. They might hear about privacy every once in a while but don't give it any thought. Most people think Android is synonymous with Samsung.

I wasn't suggesting that most non-technical people know much detail about why a company like Google might not be their best friend (I know they don't). I was addressing the idea that some people think "being big is bad in and of itself", and that I don't think that most people see it that way.

I spend a lot of time with non-technical people, so I don't think that perception is tainted by a tech bubble.

Re: United States vs. Google

#67

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Oct 21, 2020, 4:22 PM UTC

VikingCoder wrote: post #51

dsabanin wrote: post #47

I think Google is the best search engine. I don't have a problem with that. I do have a problem with them being the best search engine, top online ad platform and a developer of the top mobile OS, top video streaming service, top internet browser, top mapping/navigation service, among other things, at the SAME time. Their assets give them undue and unsupervised influence over a very big chunk of what's happening onli…

1) best search engine 2) top online ad platform 3) top mobile OS 4) top video streaming service 5) top internet browser 6) top mapping/navigation service Okay, you listed 6. What should the law say is the new limit for how many they should be able to have?

[deleted]

Re: United States vs. Google

#68

Post by deepsun » Wed, Oct 21, 2020, 4:22 PM UTC

TomasEkeli wrote: post #56

VikingCoder wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) best search engine 2) top online ad platform 3) top mobile OS 4) top video streaming service 5) top internet browser 6) top mapping/navigation service Okay, you listed 6. What should the law say is the new limit for how many they should be able to have?

one seems about right

Then government shouldn't have allowed them to buy YouTube back then. So Google might ask -- why it was legal to acquire YouTube back then, but now it's illegal.

We need to seriously reconsider SEC rules for approving acquisitions.

Re: United States vs. Google

#69

Post by JumpCrisscross » Wed, Oct 21, 2020, 4:22 PM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #6

Most interesting part IMO is at the end (emphasis mine): > That, though, is why it is a mistake to read the report as some sort of technocratic document... it is exceptionally difficult to make the case that any of these companies are causing consumer harm, which is the de facto standard for antitrust in the United States. Indeed, what makes Google’s contention that “The competition is only a click away” so infuriati…

> the meaningful technical definition of a monopoly

Note that the legal standard of consumer harm is not only uniquely American. It's a creature of the post-war judiciary, arguably, on the basis a specific reading of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890's intent [1].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Antitrust_Paradox

Re: United States vs. Google

#70

Post by 737maxtw » Wed, Oct 21, 2020, 4:22 PM UTC

VikingCoder wrote: post #51

dsabanin wrote: post #47

I think Google is the best search engine. I don't have a problem with that. I do have a problem with them being the best search engine, top online ad platform and a developer of the top mobile OS, top video streaming service, top internet browser, top mapping/navigation service, among other things, at the SAME time. Their assets give them undue and unsupervised influence over a very big chunk of what's happening onli…

1) best search engine 2) top online ad platform 3) top mobile OS 4) top video streaming service 5) top internet browser 6) top mapping/navigation service Okay, you listed 6. What should the law say is the new limit for how many they should be able to have?

Good question.

These are questions we possibly should have asked in the 60s or 70s with the Automakers.

Heck, let's think about THAT for a moment. When we look back at history we see that the big 3 took a number of anticompetitive actions over the years while managing to usually avoid government action through careful planning. (GM at times would hold back products in those decades, knowing if they went over a magic number of market share it was bad news.)

But look at the RESULT. Look at 2008. Look at the future of self driving cars and the future of the trucking industry.

By letting large monopolies run unchecked, they embed their ways of dependence into society such that impacts can be felt for generations.

Maybe its not about the number but what the damage is.

Edit: hit reply early, sorry.

The big 3 managed to get taken down by the factors of the oil embargo and the growing Asian auto industry, but we still felt the effects I listed above.

And, to that end, its worth restating that GM specifically tried to 'avoid' fitting the government definition.