3 ms·

I think until now there's been quite little talk about just how wild wild west the Web is, so I like the talk about breaking up Google. The problem is that Goo

by dmos62 7y ago

I think until now there's been quite little talk about just how wild wild west the Web is, so I like the talk about breaking up Google. The problem is that Google can use its cross-platform cross-product cross-industry reach to have a significant uncompetitive advantage. A banal example would be Google hassling non-Chrome users to use Chrome, or a link to Gmail sitting at the corner of your Google Search screen. As far as the market goes, that's stealing, because you're getting market share not through competition, but by bypassing competition. Google didn't become a behemoth in so many markets just because its products are good, but because it had an uncompetitive advantage, which is a cryptic way of saying that they were very big in an unregulated environment and they used that. I'm not talking about how Google became big, which is a nicer story about a great product. I'm talking about how after it became big it became humongous.

BlueTemplar 7y ago
Yeah, and once it became big, the government should have stepped in and forced it to split. Now it's too late, the only options now seem to be either nationalization or complete shutdown of the monopolies like Search, Maps and YouTube. And until that is done, the situation is only going to get worse...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- ttoinou 7y ago
  The situation will be worse if you break it up, what do you think will happen to a nationalized Google Search, a nationalized Google maps and a nationalized YouTube ? The services will be badly managed and get worser and worser
beagle3 7y ago
> Google didn't become a behemoth in so many markets just because its products are good, but because it had an uncompetitive advantage, which is a cryptic way of saying that they were very big in an unregulated environment and they used that. gmail gave 1GB with great email search when the standard at the time was 20-50MB; when it was announced on 1-apr, everyone thought it was a joke. Now, it's not so great - but email is hard/costly to switch, and gmail absolutely was better. google maps was and still is way way better than the competition (originally bought, was great then, continuously improved). Same with waze. google search was, and still is, much better. Chrome was insanely fast when it came out, and had many switching for that; It was only later than the google might helped it become the most prevalent. Compared to e.g. Microsoft and even Facebook, google made very little use of their monopoly position to become big in many markets, although they do use it to maintain it.
m463 7y ago
I think the less banal example is what's happening under the covers... basically tracking a person/profile through search (via google search), web browsing (via google analytics), using mail (via gmail), apps (via google play), calling/texting/more (via android), navigating (via google maps), etc... There's only one game in town when it comes to knowing who someone is, where they are, what they are doing, who they associate with and how they behave.

by dmos62 7y ago

BlueTemplar 7y ago

Yeah, and once it became big, the government should have stepped in and forced it to split. Now it's too late, the only options now seem to be either nationalization or complete shutdown of the monopolies like Search, Maps and YouTube. And until that is done, the situation is only going to get worse...

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ttoinou 7y ago
The situation will be worse if you break it up, what do you think will happen to a nationalized Google Search, a nationalized Google maps and a nationalized YouTube ? The services will be badly managed and get worser and worser

beagle3 7y ago

> Google didn't become a behemoth in so many markets just because its products are good, but because it had an uncompetitive advantage, which is a cryptic way of saying that they were very big in an unregulated environment and they used that. gmail gave 1GB with great email search when the standard at the time was 20-50MB; when it was announced on 1-apr, everyone thought it was a joke. Now, it's not so great - but email is hard/costly to switch, and gmail absolutely was better. google maps was and still is way way better than the competition (originally bought, was great then, continuously improved). Same with waze. google search was, and still is, much better. Chrome was insanely fast when it came out, and had many switching for that; It was only later than the google might helped it become the most prevalent. Compared to e.g. Microsoft and even Facebook, google made very little use of their monopoly position to become big in many markets, although they do use it to maintain it.

m463 7y ago

I think the less banal example is what's happening under the covers... basically tracking a person/profile through search (via google search), web browsing (via google analytics), using mail (via gmail), apps (via google play), calling/texting/more (via android), navigating (via google maps), etc... There's only one game in town when it comes to knowing who someone is, where they are, what they are doing, who they associate with and how they behave.