631–640 of 888 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What MSFT learned from that was to open offices in Washington DC, lobby and sell to the federal gov. Hard to find the sense in this action.
Maybe if google sold more products to the feds they wouldn't be so brazen as to kill them off
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe if google sold more products to the feds they wouldn't be so brazen as to kill them off
Google doesn't really sell products though, not to businesses. It sells individual data to businesses, it sells advertising to businesses. The only thing the government will be interested in is the spying which they aren't allowed to do, but unaccountable corporations are allowed to do. As people become more aware of this it means google becomes less and less useful.
Loving the discourse in the comments here. Speaking as someone who grew up alongside Google in a sense, I fall on the side of the "break it up" camp. It was novel at the time to have a single company so nicely provide us with everything digitally that we could need - G Suite, YouTube, Search, Maps, Advertising, Books, Reader, etc - but in hindsight, we gave too much power to too unaccountable an entity, who in turn u…
I think most people do not understand that Google funnels a lot of their profits to make Chrome and Android into OSS. Youtube may be the only viable company that can come out of Google. Rest will either have to charge a lot of money or die. And we will be left with an even more profitable ad giant, that sends back all profits to it's share holders.
No one can predict the future. HN commenters love to try, every day. For example, speculating about a "breakup".
If neither side changes their position, Google will be fighting the US government for many years to come. That we can say with reasonable certainty. Regardless of the remedy sought.
As a shareholder I do not want the company to be fighting the US government for years to come. It's not good for business.
But Google fans no doubt read the news and spin it to be positive. No matter what, in their minds only Google can win. Self-delusion.
Meanwhile, the legal process will continue. More money for the lawyers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GCP isn't a B2B product?
Yes but it's tiny compared to Google Revenue and when I messed with it, it wasn't 100% certified for Government use. Meaning if you used it for Government, you could only use select products vs Microsoft and Amazon which certified almost all their products.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> results in a materially worse world. Please explain how Google has created a materially worse world
What part of being a massive ad company whose raison d'etre is to collect as much personal information about you as possible (with limited or no consent) to enable other people to try to convince you to buy stuff even remotely a net positive for the world?
Ever bought something you didn't actually want? Were you persuaded to want something? What was the exact mechanism? Were you lied to? "Made to" somehow?
> net positive for the world
How exactly do you find out what is "net positive for the world"? Who assigns the the values and who does the tallying?
Hilarious to see all the people lamenting the break-up of AT&T. That break-up sparked the long distance phone race, which became the driving force for the massive laying of fiber optics... which enabled the Internet boom of the 1990s.
That’s a complicated chain of cause and effect to claim so casually.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I am worried about anybody holding my private data (apart from US' 3-letter agencies and thats a hill I am not going to die upon since I don't have same basic human rights as US citizens), its Meta. Sure Google is everywhere, but Meta holds much more data on our inner personal sides, which are the easiest things to actually abuse to no end. That and pornhub.
Google actually tracks associates everywhere you visit in incognito mode in chrome and associates it with your main user id. So whatever pornhub knows, so does google.