4 ms·

"Google is like a convenient highway" If I have an idea for a better highway and money to build it, I still can't just build the highway. If I have a better i

"Google is like a convenient highway" If I have an idea for a better highway and money to build it, I still can't just build the highway. If I have a better idea for a search engine, I could wipe out Google. Google is exposed to market forces, the highway isn't. Your analogy doesn't work at all.

rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
And if I had an idea for a better social network, I could replace Facebook. Just because there exists the opportunity for a competitor doesn't mean one will emerge. Until then (if it even happens!) the courts of Europe will continue to view Google as a disproportionately powerful force. Because it's an American company backed and staffed by people who fundamentally see the Internet and global economy in a different light than most Europeans (right to be forgotten, etc), Europeans have every reason to be suspicious.
- trothamel 11y ago
  You could replace Facebook, or Myspace, or Friendster, even.
- raldi 11y ago
  > And if I had an idea for a better social network, I could replace Facebook. Not necessarily. There are gigantic network effects propping Facebook up. A Facebook user who wants to try another social network needs to convince all their friends to move. And each of them has to convince their friends. But to try another search engine takes takes about five seconds. You could switch from Google to Bing immediately and never look back, if you thought Bing were better.
  - rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
    Well, um, that's exactly my point. It's not that I can switch to another service, it's that other people won't, unless they each have a strong reason to. So if I feel a ubiquitous web service maligns my business, I should be concerned about their power over the populace, not just me.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - raldi 11y ago
      Do you believe that every company with a dominant market share -- even one gained by building a better mousetrap -- deserves to have that power disrupted by the government? If not, could you name an example of such a company that you would leave alone?
      - rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
        The potential for abuse exists anywhere, even if the choice to abuse isn't made. Likewise, the government should have the potential to disrupt a company, just as it should not do so unless it has an excellent reason. This is a question of place and values. All things considered I think Google's market position is O.K., but if I were a European I would probably think differently. Not everyone wants to live by everyone else's rules (or End User License Agreement). If Europeans believe in antitrust action against Google, even if it is economically disruptive, we should respect that. Just as we should expect them to let us live as we desire elsewhere.
    - CardenB 11y ago
      I think you misunderstood his argument. His point is that you won't switch from Facebook because your friends won't switch, while your friends have no bearing on your choice of search engine.
- happyscrappy 11y ago
  Europeans are free to self harm to their hearts content.

rm_-rf_slash 11y ago

And if I had an idea for a better social network, I could replace Facebook. Just because there exists the opportunity for a competitor doesn't mean one will emerge. Until then (if it even happens!) the courts of Europe will continue to view Google as a disproportionately powerful force. Because it's an American company backed and staffed by people who fundamentally see the Internet and global economy in a different light than most Europeans (right to be forgotten, etc), Europeans have every reason to be suspicious.

trothamel 11y ago
You could replace Facebook, or Myspace, or Friendster, even.
raldi 11y ago
> And if I had an idea for a better social network, I could replace Facebook. Not necessarily. There are gigantic network effects propping Facebook up. A Facebook user who wants to try another social network needs to convince all their friends to move. And each of them has to convince their friends. But to try another search engine takes takes about five seconds. You could switch from Google to Bing immediately and never look back, if you thought Bing were better.
- rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
  Well, um, that's exactly my point. It's not that I can switch to another service, it's that other people won't, unless they each have a strong reason to. So if I feel a ubiquitous web service maligns my business, I should be concerned about their power over the populace, not just me.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - raldi 11y ago
    Do you believe that every company with a dominant market share -- even one gained by building a better mousetrap -- deserves to have that power disrupted by the government? If not, could you name an example of such a company that you would leave alone?
    - rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
      The potential for abuse exists anywhere, even if the choice to abuse isn't made. Likewise, the government should have the potential to disrupt a company, just as it should not do so unless it has an excellent reason. This is a question of place and values. All things considered I think Google's market position is O.K., but if I were a European I would probably think differently. Not everyone wants to live by everyone else's rules (or End User License Agreement). If Europeans believe in antitrust action against Google, even if it is economically disruptive, we should respect that. Just as we should expect them to let us live as we desire elsewhere.
  - CardenB 11y ago
    I think you misunderstood his argument. His point is that you won't switch from Facebook because your friends won't switch, while your friends have no bearing on your choice of search engine.
happyscrappy 11y ago
Europeans are free to self harm to their hearts content.