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

US vs. Google amicus curiae brief of Y Combinator in support of plaintiffs [pdf]

storage.courtlistener.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 1001 posts

Re: US vs. Google amicus curiae brief of Y Combinator in support of plaintiffs [pdf]

#641

Post by windexh8er »

FridayoLeary wrote: post #491
fsh wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This list is very telling. Instead of a healthy marketplace of companies competing to sell their software and services, we end up with one monopolist who gives away mediocre products and in return taxes everything you buy (in the form of ad spending), and then annoys you with the same ads. How is this a desirable outcome?

There is nothing mediocre about the search engine, gmail, maps, android, chrome etc.. etc. Do they all have room for for improvement? Probably. But they are simply incredibly, breathtakingly good products. Search, maybe has gotten worse in recent years, but it's still amazing. Maps and Satelleite view are astounding, especially when you consider that they are free. >How is this a desirable outcome? The list speaks fo…

> But they are simply incredibly, breathtakingly good products.

I literally laughed out loud at this. There is nothing further from the truth when you look at what else is out there. I feel like a lot of these comments are shilling for Google they're so biased.

Search is not amazing. Search is littered with garbage. Try out Kagi or even DDG for a day, but let's not pretend search hasn't been a dumpster fire for years now.

Re: US vs. Google amicus curiae brief of Y Combinator in support of plaintiffs [pdf]

#642

Post by randall »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #367

I'm not sure people understand what the consequences of taking away Google's ad revenue is. If a large enough bank goes under, it takes out not just the bank, but huge sectors of the economy, affecting many more businesses and jobs. That's why the government bailed out the banks when they failed. The same will happen when Google loses its ad revenue. Google is an ad company. By opening up all its trade secret data, i…

Google Cloud is a decent business though, as is YouTube.

Re: US vs. Google amicus curiae brief of Y Combinator in support of plaintiffs [pdf]

#643

Post by stogot »

BuyMyBitcoins wrote: post #422
croes wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google killed the Edge browser with the same tricks MS used. The use money and Google Play services to hinder competition. Not really less anti-competitive.

Anecdotal, but I wanted to give Edge a chance. I found out that it is quite possibly the most feature-creep rich browser on the market. Its sole purpose seems to be “let Microsoft monitor your entire browsing experience”. I also feel like Microsoft’s heavy handed dark patterns trick less computer savvy people into using it, and those people probably aren’t aware of how much info Microsoft is collecting about them. As…

Chrome has become that for google.

Re: US vs. Google amicus curiae brief of Y Combinator in support of plaintiffs [pdf]

#644

Post by pesus »

quitit wrote: post #538
jorvi wrote: post #524

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I feel like people are subconsciously aware that Google is trying to bludgeon them into getting YouTube premium, and they're simply sticking it to Google rather than giving in. Google's gone through: - one skippable 5s ad - two skippable 5s ads - one unskippable 5s and one skippable 15s ads - aforementioned or two 15s ads, one skippable - two 15s unskippable ads - removed the prerenderer 'skip' button to ma…

Those changes seem more like boiling the frog because the content they're looking for is only available on YT. I'm a firm believer in the issue being one of pricing, not that the consumer is willing to pay nothing at all. I have this view because we've already seen how users flocked to iTunes, then Spotify/Apple Music and Netflix/other streaming services when the pricing was right. We are also now watching as people…

I agree price is the issue. I'm a YouTube premium subscriber myself since I use it so much, but every friend I've talked to about it bar one has been put off by the price. Lowering the price and possibly splitting YouTube Music into its own subscription would make a big difference - I have no interest in YouTube music as I already have another music streaming subscription I'm not interested in giving up.

Re: US vs. Google amicus curiae brief of Y Combinator in support of plaintiffs [pdf]

#645

Post by jofzar »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #367

I'm not sure people understand what the consequences of taking away Google's ad revenue is. If a large enough bank goes under, it takes out not just the bank, but huge sectors of the economy, affecting many more businesses and jobs. That's why the government bailed out the banks when they failed. The same will happen when Google loses its ad revenue. Google is an ad company. By opening up all its trade secret data, i…

My favourite one that you somehow missed, which should probably be at the top, YouTube.

Re: US vs. Google amicus curiae brief of Y Combinator in support of plaintiffs [pdf]

#646

Post by windexh8er »

Krssst wrote: post #559
BeetleB wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is nothing mediocre about the search engine, gmail, maps, android, chrome etc.. etc. Search Engine: Google is fantastic with its index. Very poor with the results it returns. Sampling of the problems: - There's a reason people add site:reddit.com - the default results are often very low quality. Sure, Google has the good quality stuff indexed, but over the last 5 years they've been declining like crazy in act…

> It's nice to have an alternative to Apple, but that's the only good thing about it. Using Android reminds me of the old Windows. Very unstable. Full of spyware/bloatware. Being free to run whatever code we want as users (F-droid is a treasure). Plus actually having a "disable animations completely" button to remove unneeded slowness.

It's also amazing how awesome Android can be. When you compare GrapheneOS / CalyxOS you go from a slow, bloated phone that lasts maybe a day - to a phone you have complete control of that is performant and lasts days on a charge. The contrast is stark and most people have no clue those options exist.

Re: US vs. Google amicus curiae brief of Y Combinator in support of plaintiffs [pdf]

#647

Post by ryao »

satvikpendem wrote: post #446
suddenexample wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People bringing up this site in this specific way is a pet peeve of mine. What's the largest product that they sunset with no replacement? Stadia? Given the number of products Google has, I wouldn't consider their track record below average.

I agree. The vast majority of products "killed by Google" were ones no one were using and many were consolidated into other products.

Google Reader was fairly popular.

Re: US vs. Google amicus curiae brief of Y Combinator in support of plaintiffs [pdf]

#648

Post by satvikpendem »

ryao wrote: post #647
satvikpendem wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. The vast majority of products "killed by Google" were ones no one were using and many were consolidated into other products.

Google Reader was fairly popular.

> vast majority

Re: US vs. Google amicus curiae brief of Y Combinator in support of plaintiffs [pdf]

#649

Post by lolinder »

jahsome wrote: post #614
BrenBarn wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a large enough bank goes under, it takes out not just the bank, but huge sectors of the economy, affecting many more businesses and jobs. That's why the government bailed out the banks when they failed. That is why the banks should have been broken up into smaller banks long before we reached that point, and it is why Google should have been broken up long ago. The only way to prevent the situation you describe…

I'm reading your comment as "someone should have done something a long time ago so it's not worth considering the consequences of doing it now." That fantasy doesn't seem to take into account the specific realities of current day.

No, the comment is saying that the situation is only going to get worse from here. There will never be a better time to solve Google's anticompetitive behavior.

The consequences should be weighed and considered, but shrugging and letting Google keep on keeping on because it's too big to fail isn't a viable option.

Re: US vs. Google amicus curiae brief of Y Combinator in support of plaintiffs [pdf]

#650

Post by raydiak »

jahsome wrote: post #614
BrenBarn wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a large enough bank goes under, it takes out not just the bank, but huge sectors of the economy, affecting many more businesses and jobs. That's why the government bailed out the banks when they failed. That is why the banks should have been broken up into smaller banks long before we reached that point, and it is why Google should have been broken up long ago. The only way to prevent the situation you describe…

I'm reading your comment as "someone should have done something a long time ago so it's not worth considering the consequences of doing it now." That fantasy doesn't seem to take into account the specific realities of current day.

This is a straw man, nobody asserted that the consequences should not be considered. Clearly, whichever way we proceed there will be considerable consequences; I doubt there is any dispute about that. Your argument seems to fail to acknowledge the dystopian consequences of NOT doing something.

Also, let's dispense with inappropriate jabs such as referring to other perspectives as "fantasy".

Post reply on HN