5 ms·

Anti-trust probably...Google doesn't want to be seen as a monopoly even though it has a monopoly on search. One less lawsuit. No ads at the top also. Since t

Anti-trust probably...Google doesn't want to be seen as a monopoly even though it has a monopoly on search. One less lawsuit. No ads at the top also. Since the user is looking for a search engine on Google, it could mean they're looking for an alternative to Google.

thomasthomas 10y ago
if i was google's lawyers i'd argue search isn't an industry. they make money via ads so its in the ad industry. itsmy chief problem with thiels 0 to 1.
- kennyledet 10y ago
  Software is the industry. Search is the subcategory. Ads are a part of the business implementation of the search product. You can't say every product is automatically in the ad industry because it generates revenue with ads. If you used this logic here, what of all the other products in different industries that generate their revenue with ads?
- aisofteng 10y ago
  If you were Google's lawyer, then you would be a lawyer. From the content of your post, it seems clear you aren't one.
  - thomasthomas 10y ago
    google, facebook, twitter all eating from the same pie: ad dollars.
    - aisofteng 10y ago
      What relevance does that statement have to anything here?
    - 127001brewer 10y ago
      Actually, this comment reminded me of the following: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-03/advertisings-century-of-flat-line-growth https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-03/advertisi... TLDR;: But in one sense, the advertising business is about as static and boring as they come. The industry has never grown in scale. Looking at data since the 1920s, the U.S. advertising industry has always been about 1 percent of U.S. GDP. It’s surprisingly consistent, mostly tracking between 1 percent and 1.4 percent—and averaging 1.29 percent. So when you said, "...eating from the same pie", according to the linked article, they actually are.
      - thomasthomas 10y ago
        tangentially related: thats why i love amazon's upside. retail means theyre swimming in way bigger pond than facebook/google (at least with their core products)
      - cgriswald 10y ago
        Considering how the US GDP grew in the 20th century, I would say holding on to 1% of that requires quite a lot of growth.
aisofteng 10y ago
>Anti-trust probably... What is the legal expertise that leads you to feel you know what the motivation for a massive corporation "probably" is? And why do you think that what we are seeing is deliberate?
- corndoge 10y ago
  You don't need legal expertise to make an educated guess, it's not like the parent said "This is obviously due to anti-trust regulations." Chill out.
  - aisofteng 10y ago
    If it's an educated guess, then what is it based on?
- jaypaulynice 10y ago
  Even if I had legal expertise, I would include a disclaimer to take it as my opinion/guess...Google's lawyers could easily come at me with 'Hey how do you know this?' That's why I said 'probably'. Read Peter Thiel's "Zero to one" also. He explains it very well.

thomasthomas 10y ago

if i was google's lawyers i'd argue search isn't an industry. they make money via ads so its in the ad industry. itsmy chief problem with thiels 0 to 1.

kennyledet 10y ago
Software is the industry. Search is the subcategory. Ads are a part of the business implementation of the search product. You can't say every product is automatically in the ad industry because it generates revenue with ads. If you used this logic here, what of all the other products in different industries that generate their revenue with ads?
aisofteng 10y ago
If you were Google's lawyer, then you would be a lawyer. From the content of your post, it seems clear you aren't one.
- thomasthomas 10y ago
  google, facebook, twitter all eating from the same pie: ad dollars.
  - aisofteng 10y ago
    What relevance does that statement have to anything here?
  - 127001brewer 10y ago
    Actually, this comment reminded me of the following: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-03/advertisings-century-of-flat-line-growth https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-03/advertisi... TLDR;: But in one sense, the advertising business is about as static and boring as they come. The industry has never grown in scale. Looking at data since the 1920s, the U.S. advertising industry has always been about 1 percent of U.S. GDP. It’s surprisingly consistent, mostly tracking between 1 percent and 1.4 percent—and averaging 1.29 percent. So when you said, "...eating from the same pie", according to the linked article, they actually are.
    - thomasthomas 10y ago
      tangentially related: thats why i love amazon's upside. retail means theyre swimming in way bigger pond than facebook/google (at least with their core products)
    - cgriswald 10y ago
      Considering how the US GDP grew in the 20th century, I would say holding on to 1% of that requires quite a lot of growth.

aisofteng 10y ago

>Anti-trust probably... What is the legal expertise that leads you to feel you know what the motivation for a massive corporation "probably" is? And why do you think that what we are seeing is deliberate?

corndoge 10y ago
You don't need legal expertise to make an educated guess, it's not like the parent said "This is obviously due to anti-trust regulations." Chill out.
- aisofteng 10y ago
  If it's an educated guess, then what is it based on?
jaypaulynice 10y ago
Even if I had legal expertise, I would include a disclaimer to take it as my opinion/guess...Google's lawyers could easily come at me with 'Hey how do you know this?' That's why I said 'probably'. Read Peter Thiel's "Zero to one" also. He explains it very well.