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

991–1000 of 1001 posts

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

#991

Post by az09mugen »

rafaelmn wrote: post #848
casey2 wrote: post #814

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More pressure than the max? Do you think they are going to start using your password hashes to mine bitcoin? Whatever Google stopped tracking they did because of regulation not out of user backlash or goodwill.

Have you started seeing browser embedded ads in Chrome ? It replacing competitor ads with it's own ? Rewriting referral links ? Pushing compromised extensions from "third parties" to siphon data they legally can't. Right now it's just there to cover Googles market position - it doesn't need to make a profit, if it had to make a profit and it couldn't do exclusive search default deal I guarantee you it will get ugly -…

Another good reason to use Firefox. BTW, Firefox will be another collateral victim if it Google dies.

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

#992

Post by mzmzmzm »

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…

When is the last time any of these things have improved? Gmail and Maps are excellent but static. Is it inconceivable that competitors could match that level of service if they didn't have to compete on unfair terms, where Google's monopoly on data (I have to list my restaurant on Maps because it's dominant and I want to be found, thus Maps is more complete, etc) always gives them a comfortable edge?

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

#993

Post by raydiak »

jahsome wrote: post #906
raydiak wrote: post #754

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You still haven't addressed the consequences of NOT doing something. Perhaps you've never heard the expression about "The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now." It's an aphorism, absolutely not literal. [1] Additionally, even if it were intended literally, which it clearly was not, saying it should have been done 20 years ago is not the same as fantasizing. It also obviously conclud…

[flagged]

Review the guidelines. That level of snark and vitriol is wholly unacceptable on this site. That is why I comment here instead of, say, X. Disagreeing is not condescension. I keep stating facts, and you keep circling back to emotional aspersions. This is supposed to be a place for civilized discourse. If you are incapable of disagreeing in a mature and respectful manner, it is you who should engage yourself elsewhere.

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

#994

Post by lukaslevert »

cactusplant7374 wrote: post #480
mburns wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are search engines that sell api access to their index. Pretty sure Bing, Yahoo, and Yandex all do. Blekko also did, 10 years ago. When they still existed.

I think Brave Search does too?

We do: brave.com/api

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

#995

Post by [deleted] »

raydiak wrote: post #993
jahsome wrote: post #906

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Review the guidelines. That level of snark and vitriol is wholly unacceptable on this site. That is why I comment here instead of, say, X. Disagreeing is not condescension. I keep stating facts, and you keep circling back to emotional aspersions. This is supposed to be a place for civilized discourse. If you are incapable of disagreeing in a mature and respectful manner, it is you who should engage yourself elsewhere…

[deleted]

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

#996

Post by jahsome »

raydiak wrote: post #993
jahsome wrote: post #906

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Review the guidelines. That level of snark and vitriol is wholly unacceptable on this site. That is why I comment here instead of, say, X. Disagreeing is not condescension. I keep stating facts, and you keep circling back to emotional aspersions. This is supposed to be a place for civilized discourse. If you are incapable of disagreeing in a mature and respectful manner, it is you who should engage yourself elsewhere…

That's your case for demonstrating you're _not_ condescending? I'd expect with that superior intellect you'd be able to connect the dots.

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

#997

Post by raydiak »

jahsome wrote: post #996
raydiak wrote: post #993

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Review the guidelines. That level of snark and vitriol is wholly unacceptable on this site. That is why I comment here instead of, say, X. Disagreeing is not condescension. I keep stating facts, and you keep circling back to emotional aspersions. This is supposed to be a place for civilized discourse. If you are incapable of disagreeing in a mature and respectful manner, it is you who should engage yourself elsewhere…

That's your case for demonstrating you're _not_ condescending? I'd expect with that superior intellect you'd be able to connect the dots.

Calling a spade a spade is not condescending. You still haven't addressed the consequences of NOT doing something about Google's monopoly. You continue to ignore the fact that multiple comments from the person you were originally responding to blatantly falsified your misrepresentations. You don't care about my continued patient attempts to bring this discussion back to reason instead of personal attacks. You need some debate classes or something.

Anyway, I've done what I set out to, which is leave something for readers to think about. Changing your mind is not on my priority list, some people just can't be reasoned with. Facts are what they are, regardless of your acceptance or lack thereof. Say whatever further mean-spirited personal attacks make you feel like you "won" here, since that's apparently important to you. Go ahead and get the last word in. I'll leave you to it.

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

#998

Post by saagarjha »

hu3 wrote: post #438
prepend wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would Apple have developers working on their hardware running Linux? Apple doesn’t use Linux. They aren’t the biggest oss dev, but they have a decent amount of contributions. [0][1] It’s hard to compare how much Google vs Apple contributes to open source, but not sure why anyone would think Apple “contributes back almost nothing.” [0] https://github.com/appleopen [1] https://opensource.apple.com/projects/

Please stare at your own links for a second. Let me help you: https://github.com/orgs/appleopen/repositories?q=sort%3Astar... Their most popular repo in that entire account has 8 stars. I have multiple personal repos with more usage than that. As for the other link. More than half of those projects are Apple specific.

Those aren't official repositories; they're just someone's mirror.

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

#999

Post by saagarjha »

skippyboxedhero wrote: post #86
xyzzy9563 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many other search engine options, why should Google be punished for hiring the best people over decades to make the best one? Many consumers also switch their search to Google when presented with other options or defaults.

Because the data they possess is the monopoly, they have better search results because it is too expensive for competitors to gather the data at this point as(I also think people who are unfamiliar with finance do not understand the quantum, Meta has a similar type of business but was under huge pressure with investing tens of billions into VR...it would cost hundreds of billions to get parity with Google, there is n…

> The number of "best people" out there is usually under 500 in a country the size of the US, a country that has hundreds of thousands of employees is not hiring the best.

> I would guess under 100 people at Google actually positively impact financial results in any way

It's really funny to me that people write comments like this and yet are incapable of basic arithmetic, like this being 0.0001% of the US population, or thinking that the entire ad business runs on just 100 people who are magically making the company $4 trillion dollars while everyone else drags it down.

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

#1000

Post by immibis »

p1necone wrote: post #582
hamilyon2 wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android in this list stands out. If Android goes away, I am not sure who is there to pick up The OS of the world, not IOS, certainly, but who? All else, good riddance. More competition will make better products.

The bulk of Android is open source, the only proprietary bits are the google services.

Which are the bulk of Android because Google pushed hard to make it so
Post reply on HN