4 ms·

WSJ is the origin of the story (even Forbes links to them as being the source). How is it clickbait? Also, the title on the WSJ article right now is: "Google

by kyrra 7y ago

WSJ is the origin of the story (even Forbes links to them as being the source). How is it clickbait? Also, the title on the WSJ article right now is: "Google Resists Demand From States in Digital-Ad Probe". Also from the article: > Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is leading the investigation by 48 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and Guam, said the company’s actions suggest it is withholding information that could be damaging. > “Every indication right now is they don’t believe that they’re clean because they don’t act in any way like they are,” Mr. Paxton said in an interview. There are lots of responses from Google's side of the aisle about why they think they are in the right, but this is just a battle of he-said she-said until they go to court to fight it out. (I'm a googler, opinions are my own)

NikolaeVarius 7y ago
Clickbait can be true and still be clickbait because it picks out a single controversial sounding aspect of a story and uses that to draw people in. There can be a an actual reason that Google is not giving up documents immediately, which is brought up. I don't expect any company/person to give up everything willingly to 3rd parties.
- s3r3nity 7y ago
  Immediate reason for not giving up documents: Google is worried about leaks involving their search algorithms, which are very closely guarded (and for good reason - it's been their bread & butter up to now.) This is going to be interesting to watch, as the 'States might successfully argue that to properly understand if anticompetitive behavior took place, they need to open up the hood to the car, so to speak, and take a look at what's underneath...
  - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
    I think a lot of people would disagree that they should be allowed to keep their search algorithms secret at this juncture. The impact that this proprietary decisionmaker has on global business with no oversight is insane.
    - magduf 7y ago
      There's a bunch of other search engines out there; no one is forcing you to use Google search. Duckduckgo, Bing, Yandex, Baidu, etc. are all viable alternatives. If Google needs to open-source their search algorithms, then why shouldn't all their competitors?
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
        Their competitors aren't monopolies. The problem is that I don't use Google Search, but Google Search still impacts me in a way I can't control. Even if I use DuckDuckGo, my business lives or dies on what Google Search ranks it. Google is the ultimate kingmaker. They decide what businesses survive or die.
    - enitihas 7y ago
      The amount of proprietary stuff that has immense impact on global business (with no oversight) is huge: 1. Microsoft Windows 2. Microsoft Office I think any big tech company falls into this. And unlike google search, there is no alternative for Microsoft windows. You can change your search engine and keep using a new one without any trouble or training. Off course, you can say that the others are not good enough, but companies don't get dismantled because competitors are not good enough. Switching from MS windows is alas, not possible. The main thing is the large number of applications available for it and not for other platforms, and also needs significantly more training than switching away from Google search.
      - s3r3nity 7y ago
        >The amount of proprietary stuff that has immense impact on global business (with no oversight) is huge... The issue isn't market share alone - it's whether or not the company leverages that in an anti-competitive way. Ex: installing Microsoft Office on a Mac doesn't uninstall Numbers or Keynote off your machine. Or installing the Outlook app on Android doesn't ask you to switch your default email client every time you open the app. However, try using Google Search in Edge or Safari and you'll see a bunch of ads and tool tips pushing the user to install Chrome. Or see the reported cases of Edge users not being able to play on Google Stadia unless they switch to Chrome. > And unlike google search, there is no alternative for Microsoft windows. Google Docs / Apple iWork Suite (Numbers, Pages, Keynote, etc.) would disagree.

by kyrra 7y ago

NikolaeVarius 7y ago

Clickbait can be true and still be clickbait because it picks out a single controversial sounding aspect of a story and uses that to draw people in. There can be a an actual reason that Google is not giving up documents immediately, which is brought up. I don't expect any company/person to give up everything willingly to 3rd parties.

s3r3nity 7y ago
Immediate reason for not giving up documents: Google is worried about leaks involving their search algorithms, which are very closely guarded (and for good reason - it's been their bread & butter up to now.) This is going to be interesting to watch, as the 'States might successfully argue that to properly understand if anticompetitive behavior took place, they need to open up the hood to the car, so to speak, and take a look at what's underneath...
- ocdtrekkie 7y ago
  I think a lot of people would disagree that they should be allowed to keep their search algorithms secret at this juncture. The impact that this proprietary decisionmaker has on global business with no oversight is insane.
  - magduf 7y ago
    There's a bunch of other search engines out there; no one is forcing you to use Google search. Duckduckgo, Bing, Yandex, Baidu, etc. are all viable alternatives. If Google needs to open-source their search algorithms, then why shouldn't all their competitors?
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    - ocdtrekkie 7y ago
      Their competitors aren't monopolies. The problem is that I don't use Google Search, but Google Search still impacts me in a way I can't control. Even if I use DuckDuckGo, my business lives or dies on what Google Search ranks it. Google is the ultimate kingmaker. They decide what businesses survive or die.
  - enitihas 7y ago
    The amount of proprietary stuff that has immense impact on global business (with no oversight) is huge: 1. Microsoft Windows 2. Microsoft Office I think any big tech company falls into this. And unlike google search, there is no alternative for Microsoft windows. You can change your search engine and keep using a new one without any trouble or training. Off course, you can say that the others are not good enough, but companies don't get dismantled because competitors are not good enough. Switching from MS windows is alas, not possible. The main thing is the large number of applications available for it and not for other platforms, and also needs significantly more training than switching away from Google search.
    - s3r3nity 7y ago
      >The amount of proprietary stuff that has immense impact on global business (with no oversight) is huge... The issue isn't market share alone - it's whether or not the company leverages that in an anti-competitive way. Ex: installing Microsoft Office on a Mac doesn't uninstall Numbers or Keynote off your machine. Or installing the Outlook app on Android doesn't ask you to switch your default email client every time you open the app. However, try using Google Search in Edge or Safari and you'll see a bunch of ads and tool tips pushing the user to install Chrome. Or see the reported cases of Edge users not being able to play on Google Stadia unless they switch to Chrome. > And unlike google search, there is no alternative for Microsoft windows. Google Docs / Apple iWork Suite (Numbers, Pages, Keynote, etc.) would disagree.