13 ms·

This is the perennial discussion on HN as HN'ers get popularity confused with monopoly. I get the anti-Google sentiment but outside of the Play services agreem

This is the perennial discussion on HN as HN'ers get popularity confused with monopoly. I get the anti-Google sentiment but outside of the Play services agreements that Google got dinged for with Android manufacturers, they're not being anti-competitive. If Google were to block search results to DuckDuckGo for example, that would be monopolistic and warrant antitrust action. As it is now, Google isn't blocking competition, consumers are choosing to use Google despite the privacy-oriented preferences here on HN.

dylan604 6y ago
>consumers are choosing to use Google despite the privacy-oriented preferences here on HN. I'm not sure I'd agree with the word "despite". I still think the majority of the non-tech world is still oblivious to the privacy implications of G,FB,etc. Sure, I'm sure there's a percentage of people that have made the decision they don't care and are fine with it, but there are definitely don't know/understand.
- renewiltord 6y ago
  No. It's in all the news. But the truth is people love Google. Google gives them so many services for free that they didn't have before. In many 3rd world countries, smartphones were the "couple months salary" iPhone or an Android that's literally a tenth the cost. To most of these people, Google has been an unalloyed good. Google is probably one of the most resilient brands worldwide. Even in America it's well trusted. For good reason.
  - dylan604 6y ago
    Huh? So we're supposed to thank them for the cancer they have wrought? Search was a good thing, then it got bastardized into a gaming system. Free email? Sounds great until the day you find out you're not the only one reading the email. Android is an interesting side project that has proven a useful alt to some. Again until you realize it, along with all of the other "useful" products, was just the long con into gathering all of the data to make Ads viable. If these products were just the products they appear on the surface, then maybe I'd say Google was reputable.
    - JAlexoid 6y ago
      And most people are completely fine with having ads targeted at them. You're just raging that other people have a different opinion about their online activity. Now imagine you quantify the cost of having Google Search. If you search for florist - Google could charge you $10 for the results(florist CPC is very high) and up to $30 per search for a hotel in NYC.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - pb7 6y ago
      >cancer So dramatic. It's an amazing product that billions of people depend on that you don't have to use if you don't want to. Pretend it doesn't exist if it makes you feel better. Try Bing and Proton mail on an iPhone and never look back. >If these products were just the products they appear on the surface They're not a charity. If you're not paying for it upfront, you're paying for it with your eyeballs. Don't like it? Take your eyeballs elsewhere.
  - roenxi 6y ago
    > Google is probably one of the most resilient brands worldwide. Even in America it's well trusted. For good reason. Two types of trust though. Trust in the products which they've earned in spades, and trust to moderate political speech which they have not. This story is suggesting that they are willing to enforce standards set by the Chinese propaganda departments - which is to be expected, really, given their interest in regaining a presence in China. They aren't trustworthy in the political sense.
kube-system 6y ago
Google has and does block competition, and they've attracted the attention of antitrust regulators for this on multiple occasions.
- three_seagrass 6y ago
  >Google has and does block competition Can you share some of these occasions?
  - kube-system 6y ago
    Here's some past regulatory attention: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_vs._Google https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_vs._Google https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2013/01/google-agrees-change-its-business-practices-resolve-ftc https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2013/01/googl... And some upcoming regulatory attention: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/15/technology/google-antitrust-investigation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/15/technology/google-antitru...
    - three_seagrass 6y ago
      That's not blocking competitors though. I specifically didn't bring up the Shopping case because EU anti-trust law is very different, and the case doesn't qualify as anti-trust in the U.S.
      - kube-system 6y ago
        The blocking of competition was mentioned several times in the links I posted. Here's a couple of quotes: > Google required direct partners to exclusively use Google's AdSense and could not engage with Google's competitors > Google required that partners take a minimum number of Google ads and predominately place them above any other advertising, nor could place ads from other services above or alongside Google's ads; > preventing manufacturers from selling smart mobile devices running on competing operating systems > Google entered into anticompetitive exclusive agreements for the distribution of Google Search on both desktop and in the mobile arena > The Commission’s complaint alleges that Google reneged on its FRAND commitments and pursued – or threatened to pursue – injunctions against companies that need to use MMI’s standard-essential patents in their devices and were willing to license them on FRAND terms.
gentleman11 6y ago
They do deliberately slow their sites on Firefox, as has been discussed in many past hn articles. YouTube for example. Pardon my lack of references, you should confirm for yourself with a hn search in case I am mistaken
- three_seagrass 6y ago
  IIRC that's because YT switched to polymer, and since Mozilla doesn't support the new shadow dom APIs yet, YT serves it with the older version.
  - drdeca 6y ago
    My understanding is that the "deliberate slowing" reported, was such that if you have firefox send a chrome user agent, that one gets faster (and functional) results. Is that consistent with the "it is because FF doesn't support new thing yet" explanation?
    - three_seagrass 6y ago
      No because again, IIRC, sending a chrome user agent to YT in FF breaks a lot of the functionality.
      - drdeca 6y ago
        Ah, “the parts that work are faster but a lot of it is broken” does seem like it suggests the benign explanation
      - ric2b 6y ago
        Does it? What stops working, since I haven't noticed anything?
  - thejsa 6y ago
    I believe it was that YT was using the legacy v0 shadow DOM API that only Chrom[e|ium] supported, with a slow polyfill for other browsers, rather than the much better supported v1 API that all other major browser makers agreed to implement.
supermatt 6y ago
And conversely, other HN'ers get confused by a very narrow definition of what constitutes a market. It is this very definition that is under scrutiny.
gowld 6y ago
You are one of those confused HNers. Monopoly power is different from abuse of monopoly power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly#Establishing_dominance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly#Establishing_dominanc...
- three_seagrass 6y ago
  Right, hence the statement about anti-competitive behavior. GP is saying Google is a monopoly based on marketshare though, not monopolistic action, which is not correct.
heavyset_go 6y ago
A monopoly is not a lack of other options.
- three_seagrass 6y ago
  Nope. A monopoly is definitely the lack of other options for suppliers, i.e. a single supplier. Conversely, a monopsony is the lack of other options for buyers. Words matter.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
grawprog 6y ago
As of some recent update on the ps4, at least since january, I am unable to enter any text on duckduckgo's search bar in the built in browser. The keyboard pops up briefly then vanishes. It likely works with an external keyboard, but the onscreen one refuses to appear. Google's search bar work's fine, the PlayStation's built in search works fine(but uses google), in site search engines powered by google work fine. But I have been unable to use duckduckgo on the ps4 since at least then. I was capable of doing this before and regularly did. But, from what i've been able to tell, my web searches must all go through google now, either through the built in search feature or the browser.
- jvolkman 6y ago
  What about bing?
  - grawprog 6y ago
    Well I never tried because the idea of using Microsoft's search wasn't much more appealing and honestly, I just never think about or consider them and kind of forget Bing exists. But it'd be interesting to see if it worked. They're more of a direct competitor to Sony at least in the console market.
- thejsa 6y ago
  If you haven’t already, maybe try the plain HTML [0] or (failing that) Lite [1] version of DDG. [0]: https://ddg.gg/html https://ddg.gg/html [1]: https://ddg.gg/lite https://ddg.gg/lite

dylan604 6y ago

>consumers are choosing to use Google despite the privacy-oriented preferences here on HN. I'm not sure I'd agree with the word "despite". I still think the majority of the non-tech world is still oblivious to the privacy implications of G,FB,etc. Sure, I'm sure there's a percentage of people that have made the decision they don't care and are fine with it, but there are definitely don't know/understand.

renewiltord 6y ago
No. It's in all the news. But the truth is people love Google. Google gives them so many services for free that they didn't have before. In many 3rd world countries, smartphones were the "couple months salary" iPhone or an Android that's literally a tenth the cost. To most of these people, Google has been an unalloyed good. Google is probably one of the most resilient brands worldwide. Even in America it's well trusted. For good reason.
- dylan604 6y ago
  Huh? So we're supposed to thank them for the cancer they have wrought? Search was a good thing, then it got bastardized into a gaming system. Free email? Sounds great until the day you find out you're not the only one reading the email. Android is an interesting side project that has proven a useful alt to some. Again until you realize it, along with all of the other "useful" products, was just the long con into gathering all of the data to make Ads viable. If these products were just the products they appear on the surface, then maybe I'd say Google was reputable.
  - JAlexoid 6y ago
    And most people are completely fine with having ads targeted at them. You're just raging that other people have a different opinion about their online activity. Now imagine you quantify the cost of having Google Search. If you search for florist - Google could charge you $10 for the results(florist CPC is very high) and up to $30 per search for a hotel in NYC.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - pb7 6y ago
    >cancer So dramatic. It's an amazing product that billions of people depend on that you don't have to use if you don't want to. Pretend it doesn't exist if it makes you feel better. Try Bing and Proton mail on an iPhone and never look back. >If these products were just the products they appear on the surface They're not a charity. If you're not paying for it upfront, you're paying for it with your eyeballs. Don't like it? Take your eyeballs elsewhere.
- roenxi 6y ago
  > Google is probably one of the most resilient brands worldwide. Even in America it's well trusted. For good reason. Two types of trust though. Trust in the products which they've earned in spades, and trust to moderate political speech which they have not. This story is suggesting that they are willing to enforce standards set by the Chinese propaganda departments - which is to be expected, really, given their interest in regaining a presence in China. They aren't trustworthy in the political sense.

kube-system 6y ago

Google has and does block competition, and they've attracted the attention of antitrust regulators for this on multiple occasions.

three_seagrass 6y ago
>Google has and does block competition Can you share some of these occasions?
- kube-system 6y ago
  Here's some past regulatory attention: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_vs._Google https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_vs._Google https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2013/01/google-agrees-change-its-business-practices-resolve-ftc https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2013/01/googl... And some upcoming regulatory attention: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/15/technology/google-antitrust-investigation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/15/technology/google-antitru...
  - three_seagrass 6y ago
    That's not blocking competitors though. I specifically didn't bring up the Shopping case because EU anti-trust law is very different, and the case doesn't qualify as anti-trust in the U.S.
    - kube-system 6y ago
      The blocking of competition was mentioned several times in the links I posted. Here's a couple of quotes: > Google required direct partners to exclusively use Google's AdSense and could not engage with Google's competitors > Google required that partners take a minimum number of Google ads and predominately place them above any other advertising, nor could place ads from other services above or alongside Google's ads; > preventing manufacturers from selling smart mobile devices running on competing operating systems > Google entered into anticompetitive exclusive agreements for the distribution of Google Search on both desktop and in the mobile arena > The Commission’s complaint alleges that Google reneged on its FRAND commitments and pursued – or threatened to pursue – injunctions against companies that need to use MMI’s standard-essential patents in their devices and were willing to license them on FRAND terms.

gentleman11 6y ago

They do deliberately slow their sites on Firefox, as has been discussed in many past hn articles. YouTube for example. Pardon my lack of references, you should confirm for yourself with a hn search in case I am mistaken

three_seagrass 6y ago
IIRC that's because YT switched to polymer, and since Mozilla doesn't support the new shadow dom APIs yet, YT serves it with the older version.
- drdeca 6y ago
  My understanding is that the "deliberate slowing" reported, was such that if you have firefox send a chrome user agent, that one gets faster (and functional) results. Is that consistent with the "it is because FF doesn't support new thing yet" explanation?
  - three_seagrass 6y ago
    No because again, IIRC, sending a chrome user agent to YT in FF breaks a lot of the functionality.
    - drdeca 6y ago
      Ah, “the parts that work are faster but a lot of it is broken” does seem like it suggests the benign explanation
    - ric2b 6y ago
      Does it? What stops working, since I haven't noticed anything?
- thejsa 6y ago
  I believe it was that YT was using the legacy v0 shadow DOM API that only Chrom[e|ium] supported, with a slow polyfill for other browsers, rather than the much better supported v1 API that all other major browser makers agreed to implement.

supermatt 6y ago

And conversely, other HN'ers get confused by a very narrow definition of what constitutes a market. It is this very definition that is under scrutiny.

gowld 6y ago

You are one of those confused HNers. Monopoly power is different from abuse of monopoly power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly#Establishing_dominance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly#Establishing_dominanc...

three_seagrass 6y ago
Right, hence the statement about anti-competitive behavior. GP is saying Google is a monopoly based on marketshare though, not monopolistic action, which is not correct.

heavyset_go 6y ago

A monopoly is not a lack of other options.

three_seagrass 6y ago
Nope. A monopoly is definitely the lack of other options for suppliers, i.e. a single supplier. Conversely, a monopsony is the lack of other options for buyers. Words matter.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

grawprog 6y ago

As of some recent update on the ps4, at least since january, I am unable to enter any text on duckduckgo's search bar in the built in browser. The keyboard pops up briefly then vanishes. It likely works with an external keyboard, but the onscreen one refuses to appear. Google's search bar work's fine, the PlayStation's built in search works fine(but uses google), in site search engines powered by google work fine. But I have been unable to use duckduckgo on the ps4 since at least then. I was capable of doing this before and regularly did. But, from what i've been able to tell, my web searches must all go through google now, either through the built in search feature or the browser.

jvolkman 6y ago
What about bing?
- grawprog 6y ago
  Well I never tried because the idea of using Microsoft's search wasn't much more appealing and honestly, I just never think about or consider them and kind of forget Bing exists. But it'd be interesting to see if it worked. They're more of a direct competitor to Sony at least in the console market.
thejsa 6y ago
If you haven’t already, maybe try the plain HTML [0] or (failing that) Lite [1] version of DDG. [0]: https://ddg.gg/html https://ddg.gg/html [1]: https://ddg.gg/lite https://ddg.gg/lite