Google Reneged on the Monopolistic Bargain
pluralistic.net
Google Reneged on the Monopolistic Bargain
1–10 of 68 posts
Re: Google Reneged on the Monopolistic Bargain
#2> A company that can't figure out the difference between a scam like Better Homes and Gardens and a rigorous review site like Housefresh should be pouring every spare dime it brings in into fixing this problem. Not buying default search status on every platform so that we never try another search engine: they should be fixing their shit.
Re: Google Reneged on the Monopolistic Bargain
#3> A company that can't figure out the difference between a scam like Better Homes and Gardens and a rigorous review site like Housefresh should be pouring every spare dime it brings in into fixing this problem. Not buying default search status on every platform so that we never try another search engine: they should be fixing their shit.
Well summarized. Anti-competition has become the new standard operating model.
Re: Google Reneged on the Monopolistic Bargain
#4So... the problem isn't that Google search isn't good but that (1) the ads sold are many and to some people who are scammers, and (2) enough of how the search engine algorithm works has become common knowledge and exploited by SEO experts seeking to inflate the relevance of sites by using what they know of how Google ranks search results.
But for this to become a problem Google first had to come up with a system better than everyone else's.
Sounds like a classic dilemma to me.
Re: Google Reneged on the Monopolistic Bargain
#5Amazingly written, hilarious, but I figured out what’s frustrating me: the focus on being a consumer. If you’re using words like “enshittocene” I feel you should think a little more about writing a post focusing on why Google isn’t helpful for product reviews. Google n co are destroying democracy and the planet itself, and to spend our final days complaining that sometimes people buy bad products seems out of touch.
Google literally has one job: to detect this kind of thing and crush it. The deal we made with Google was, "You monopolize search and use your monopoly rents to ensure that we never, ever try another search engine. In return, you will somehow distinguish between low-effort, useless nonsense and good information.
Re: Google Reneged on the Monopolistic Bargain
#6The abstract thesis here is that if you have a near-monopoly in some domain, where the product's quality is dependent on someone else, for example,
* links and content on pages that Google search engine ranks
* reviews on the Amazon market
then everyone is going to use every trick in the book to come out on top, and that will just constantly degrade your product.
If there was competition in the domain, then the tricks used for one search engine might not work for other search engines. So the situation might be better in the long run.
Re: Google Reneged on the Monopolistic Bargain
#7It's the very definition of selling out. This seems to be a very common trend with the vast majority of all previously respected institutions (at least in the USA). They have all sold out (literally sold the company, in many cases) and have now abandoned all principles (or pretenses) of decency and provision of value to customers. Now they are just trading on past integrity that is no longer reality. They will coast on their dwindling reputations for as long as they can get away with it.
The attitude is "Fuck you, pay me." but wrapped in massive amounts of PR spin in an attempt to obfuscate the realty and deflect the blame.
Re: Google Reneged on the Monopolistic Bargain
#8Amazingly written, hilarious, but I figured out what’s frustrating me: the focus on being a consumer. If you’re using words like “enshittocene” I feel you should think a little more about writing a post focusing on why Google isn’t helpful for product reviews. Google n co are destroying democracy and the planet itself , and to spend our final days complaining that sometimes people buy bad products seems out of touch.…
> We didn’t agree to a deal with Google!
We refuse to bring down governments who don't write the laws necessary to break up Google. So there is complicity there.
Re: Google Reneged on the Monopolistic Bargain
#9> A company that can't figure out the difference between a scam like Better Homes and Gardens and a rigorous review site like Housefresh should be pouring every spare dime it brings in into fixing this problem. Not buying default search status on every platform so that we never try another search engine: they should be fixing their shit.
Well summarized. Anti-competition has become the new standard operating model.
At least in the US, I believe we've proven that anti-competition regulations don't work and that the government realized its easier to regulate the consumer than to deal with regulating massive corporations.
If you want to win reelection you're much better off taking massive piles of cash from big businesses and regulate consumers to help create the monopolies. Trying to protect consumers by breaking up monopolies and promoting healthy market competition will see you leaving office in a hurry.
Re: Google Reneged on the Monopolistic Bargain
#10So... the problem isn't that Google search isn't good but that (1) the ads sold are many and to some people who are scammers, and (2) enough of how the search engine algorithm works has become common knowledge and exploited by SEO experts seeking to inflate the relevance of sites by using what they know of how Google ranks search results. But for this to become a problem Google first had to come up with a system bett…
No, the schemes being used are decidedly low tech for the most part and trivially detectable. Google's result quality isn't dying a death of a thousand cuts due to hordes of disreputable actors, it's dying a death of Google being dependent on a small basket of sleazy companies that they're economically in bed with.