Ohio sues Google, seeks to declare the internet company a public utility • Hacker News Board

Re: Ohio sues Google, seeks to declare the internet company a public utility

#681

Post by throwaway_kufu » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 2:02 PM UTC

rgbrenner wrote: post #538

amadeuspagel wrote: post #451

If we ignore all this culture war bullshit for a minute there's a really fascinating issue here. The concrete issue is flight search. When you google "flight from a to b", rather then seeing search results linking to websites for flight search, the first thing you see is the results of Google's own flight search. Is that wrong? What about image search? When you search for "skyline berlin", you'll see images of berlin…

google could take over almost any business like this. That didn't happen to travel companies. Google added flights, but Booking Holdings (aka Priceline) continued to grow each year to 15B in revenue for 2019. (Huge drop for 2020 obviously.) If I type " weather" google will show me the weather, but which weather company has shutdown because of that? Google news is in the search results, but there are a lot of news com…

> Google added flights, but Booking Holdings (aka Priceline) continued to grow each year to 15B in revenue for 2019. (Huge drop for 2020 obviously.)

But did advertising on Google become more expensive for competitors once Google entered the market (e.g. did Google Flights also bid on Google Ads) and were those additional costs passed along to customers?

So while your example shows a competitor survived, it over looks the many start ups that did not, it overlooks the increased advertising costs, it over looks the increased cost to consumers and the chilling effect on potential new startups that might have been able to enter the market.

We do not even need to question any of this because before Google acquired the startup which became Google Flights the acquisition was reviewed and only approved under very strict Chinese firewalls between Google flights and Google search…but those restrictions only sought to restrict Google flight’s complete takeover of the market and ignored how it is being used to increase ad costs to the remaining market competitors.

The same has been seen with Google shopping, where Google essentially acquired a startup, it flopped, then Google positioned itself ahead of organic results and began systematically burying competition in the Google results. The fact you can’t name any of the travel or shopping startups that had thriving businesses that fell once Google entered the market is more telling of how Google has dominated the market rather than evidence Google hasn’t actually put anyone out of business.

Re: Ohio sues Google, seeks to declare the internet company a public utility

#682

Post by inetknght » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 2:05 PM UTC

ahallock wrote: post #671

amadeuspagel wrote: post #451

If we ignore all this culture war bullshit for a minute there's a really fascinating issue here. The concrete issue is flight search. When you google "flight from a to b", rather then seeing search results linking to websites for flight search, the first thing you see is the results of Google's own flight search. Is that wrong? What about image search? When you search for "skyline berlin", you'll see images of berlin…

> There are only two clear, non-arbitrary rules: Search engines are only allowed to show a list of links, or search engines can show whatever they want. I want companies to be able to design products that best serve customers, not ones limited by narrowly scoped product definitions. Google's search page has advanced beyond query + results, offering interactivity and shortcuts. I'm not saying we shouldn't be vigilant…

> I'm not saying we shouldn't be vigilant if they start abusing their position

I think that's exactly what's going on though.

> and dominating too many markets

How many is too many? I could make the same argument for Walmart, Amazon, ...

> but let's take that case by case.

No. Let's not drown people in having too many lawsuits. It's time for a sea of change.

Re: Ohio sues Google, seeks to declare the internet company a public utility

#683

Post by lotsofpulp » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 2:09 PM UTC

ahallock wrote: post #673

lotsofpulp wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has no reason to exist in the first place. All the data for weather comes from government agencies anyway, and weather.gov does the same job. They’re a relic from when we did not have internet and there might have been some utility in a middleman producing a TV channel to get people that information.

While weather.gov does serve that purpose, someone else could provide a much better UI -- sort of like what Simple did with banking (I know they shutdown...haha, but they did create a better experience over traditional banking). Why give one website a monopoly?

I am not saying they should be restricted from existing, but I do not see a business case for it, at least certainly not as big of a company as it used to be.

Re: Ohio sues Google, seeks to declare the internet company a public utility

#684

Post by lotsofpulp » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 2:10 PM UTC

swiley wrote: post #665

Frost1x wrote: post #661

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, NWS does a poor job at presenting their own data. Some services do add their own models to NWS but the vast majority just re-wrap NWS forecasts. NWS data visualizations and the websites aren't the snazziest things but they do work.

I guess I'm weird but I prefer the NWS.

Me too, it’s so nice and simple.

Re: Ohio sues Google, seeks to declare the internet company a public utility

#685

Post by titzer » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 2:15 PM UTC

cbolton wrote: post #668

johbjo wrote: post #616

Let's say the electric company wants to start a restaurant. So they shut the power to the competing restaurants in the neighbourhood. Everyone agrees it would be outrageous. Now, what about Apple dictating payment policy on apps in the app store? Google premiering their own services in the results? Forcing their own apps onto all Android devices, impossible to remove? These platforms turn themselves into natural mono…

This analogy seems way off to me. It completely misses the fact that Google is doing what it's supposed to do which is giving the user the information they're looking for. I don't think cutting power is giving the customer (restaurants) or users (not clear in the analogy) what they want. It's true that with flight search, competitor results are de-emphasized, but as far as I'm concerned Google could even drop them en…

> It completely misses the fact that Google is doing what it's supposed to do which is giving the user the information they're looking for.

It used to work that way in the beginning. Now it steers you to whatever the highest bidder wants, whatever their massive opaque ad-revenue-optimizing AI thinks is best, which incidentally seems to be SEO-optimized, pre-digested and ad-laden portals into a whole other ecosystem of in-your-face click farms and garbage results stabbing you in the eyeballs.

Were you not aware of the massive conflict of interest that a search engine with ads represents...from the very beginning?

Re: Ohio sues Google, seeks to declare the internet company a public utility

#686

Post by Matticus_Rex » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 2:16 PM UTC

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #262

Matticus_Rex wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it's really cool that a company has done a good enough job in so many different areas that the other alternatives are often unambiguously worse.

No, its products are forced down your threat and impossible to avoid.

If they're hard to avoid, it's because lots of people are voluntarily choosing them because (in their estimation) they provide the best value for cost.

I personally find it rather annoying that the mumbly trap influence has infiltrated a lot of popular rap, and if I'm going to hang out with other hip hop fans, I end up hearing some stuff I don't personally love. But it's popular because a lot of people like it. It's not impossible to avoid -- there's just a cost to avoiding it because of its popularity.

Google's like that.

Re: Ohio sues Google, seeks to declare the internet company a public utility

#687

Post by brokencode » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 2:16 PM UTC

unishark wrote: post #537

brokencode wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and maybe they should be regulated too. They enjoy dominant positions in the market and blatantly rip off successful products down to the color and bottle shape.

But any idiot can figure out which are the successful products on those search engines. They are literally there trying to be found and broadcast their popularity. The patent system is for protecting ideas which the law allows to be protected.

But any idiot can’t get Walmart or Amazon to prominently place their copycat product on shelves or in search results. Only these retail behemoths can guarantee the competitive placement of their products in the market.

Re: Ohio sues Google, seeks to declare the internet company a public utility

#688

Post by jrochkind1 » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 2:24 PM UTC

muyuu wrote: post #677

voxl wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The obvious? More control over a perceived liberal-biased company from a republican controlled state.

I'm not American but I find it worrisome that some of the largest companies in the US (and the world) are so "obviously" partisan and willing to exert their power in a partisan fashion, as people accept this reality uncritically - whether it's in favour of their allegiances or not. That's what a dangerously broken society looks like. The common folk should never be openly supportive of "robber baron"-style political…

Well, what is "obvious" is under dispute too.

It is not "obvious" to me that for instance Google is particularly partisan. Most big companies donate to both USA parties in large quantities, because they know they need to buy the politicians whoever is in power. I haven't looked it up, but I assume Google is similar in it's lobbying.

The largest companies are almost always mostly looking out for their own profits, and use their not inconsiderable power mostly to that end. And that's not unprecedented. I don't know if it should be less worrisome that we accept that uncritically!

(Btw, to say something is unprecedented and call it "robber baron style" is a bit confusing, since the term "robber baron" as applied to industrialists/capitalists is over 100 years old! Whatever the "robber baron style" is, it originated in the 19th century! so not unprecedented)

Re: Ohio sues Google, seeks to declare the internet company a public utility

#689

Post by travisporter » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 2:33 PM UTC

jonathankoren wrote: post #662

greyman wrote: post #642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>grabbing free info anyone can get Yes, that's true, the info is free in a sense that someone published it on the internet. But taking the weather companies as an example, someone has to measure the weather, and then compute the predictions. That'a real cost someone needs to pay. And that I think is the reason some people don't like what Google is doing - they are displaying the temperature, while someone else paid f…

TBF though, weather is like the worst example of rent seeking. The people that provide the most value to weather reporting and prediction is the federal government through the a National Weather Service. Private companies usually just repackage the free government provided reports, or they do some analysis on top of the government provided data. That’s what has always made AccuWeather’s attempt to “privatize” (in rea…

Agreed. weather.gov is maybe a bit ugly but works great, and is mobile optimized.

Although I disagree with other point, spokeo and fastpeoplesearch is the absolute worst example of digging through private info of millions and "only consolidating it". SWEs working on this type of stuff are either immature or have no soul in my opinion

Re: Ohio sues Google, seeks to declare the internet company a public utility

#690

Post by dimitrios1 » Wed, Jun 09, 2021, 2:33 PM UTC

Jcowell wrote: post #557

dimitrios1 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the beginning of the Republican rebrand to be the people's party again, since democrats have abandoned that cause long ago. They simply seek to be the in charge political force, and they are winning, as evidenced by every major corporation seemingly overnight bending over to satisfy democratic candidates and democratic voting blocs.

Not that I want to get into politics on HN but care we seriously forgetting which party didn’t vote to pass a stimulus bill for the people a couple a months ago?

Also not to get into politics, but this one is near to me -- Is anyone in our ___ing government ever going to actually care about this insane debt we've accumulated? Do you know how long HN made fun of Uber for burning through investor cash? What about our Government? Are they beyond critique? What's wrong with not passing a stimulus bill?

It was the correct move in my opinion. What in god's green earth are we doing adding trillions more to our deficit when we are rapidly approaching 30 trillion in the red? We are sacrificing many future generations. No one has stopped to think if the long term trade offs are worth it. No one stopped to think if all this damage to the mental health of our young ones, our future, is worth it, if the isolation is worth it. No one stopped to think at all. Arguably if the federal government would stop being everyone's baby sitter, it may push states and local governments to do their own jobs instead.

But alas, no one thinks like this anymore. They just think there's an infinite well of money, and big daddy government is always going to be there to give me a loan, and it will always continue to be this way, when there are many, many examples of this not being the case. Rome will fall.