5 ms·

Breakups are very hard. Microsoft was overturned on appeal.

Avicebron 6y ago
If it can be overturned with an appeal doesn't that only reinforce the underlying problem? If just me as a user of the platform have been feeling increasingly squeezed by AMP, more and more aggressive ads, poorer search results. Large scale data collection, the deeply troubling stance on privacy and anonymity, shouldn't there be a more collective way to say enough? And to just head this off: "Just switch platforms bro, there are tons of other options out there, haven't you heard of DDG?" this isn't a valid response and instinctively I know you know it to, that's why there is talk of anti-trust.
- renewiltord 6y ago
  Wait, why doesn't it work? I have a friend who uses Brave and DDG and all that. Brave will block the trackers but you could just as well install Chrom(e|ium) with uBlock Origin (and uMatrix if you're so inclined) and also get one of those Amp-bypass plugins.
  - ocdtrekkie 6y ago
    The issue is that unless a large enough percentage of users do so, Google still controls the market, and runs the table on the other side. Google is an intermediary in the chain between other businesses which run ads and seek search placement, and consumers which see ads and look at searches. As long as Google holds 90% of the market, businesses have to advertise with Google, and websites have to cater to Google's search ranking demands. And users choosing to switch never happens in large enough quantities to change this: Almost everyone uses the default search provider. Which is why Google operates Chrome, Android, and pays for Firefox and Safari search placement. And even if half those platforms weren't first party (and monopolies in their own right), they can't get outbid easily on the other ones because, due to the existing monopoly, they have more money to bid than everyone else. Fundamentally, I think the bare minimum to handle Google is breaking Android and Chrome away from Google and prohibiting the company from operating their own browsers and operating systems. (It might also be prudent to set limits on their ability to bid for default search placement, as a way to encourage browsers to shift to a browser choice model, which would be hard to compel Firefox and Safari, in particular, to do within the confines of a suit against Google.)
    - renewiltord 6y ago
      I think that is a non-sequitur in this discussion which is about a user > If just me as a user of the platform have been feeling increasingly squeezed by AMP, more and more aggressive ads, poorer search results. Large scale data collection, the deeply troubling stance on privacy and anonymity, shouldn't there be a more collective way to say enough?
      - Avicebron 6y ago
        How is this a non-sequitur? There is a clear issue that led to a question about said issue? Issues with google, why is there not a way to solve this? Straightforward.
        renewiltord 6y ago
        A fair question. I think it comes from the fact that: > If just me as a user of the platform have been feeling increasingly squeezed by AMP, more and more aggressive ads, poorer search results. Large scale data collection, the deeply troubling stance on privacy and anonymity, shouldn't there be a more collective way to say enough? So, we're focusing as a user here. Switching to uBlock Origin Chromium + DDG + Amp bypass extension: * Squeezed by Amp -> Solved * More and more aggressive ads -> No ads, solved * Large scale data collection -> Blocked, solved * Troubling stance on privacy and anonymity -> No data access to your data, solved > And to just head this off: "Just switch platforms bro, there are tons of other options out there, haven't you heard of DDG?" this isn't a valid response and instinctively I know you know it to, that's why there is talk of anti-trust. Everything is dodgeable as a user. Therefore it _is_ a valid response and I do not instinctively know it's not right. There are good arguments, to be clear. If most people are on Gmail and they won't access mail. If Maps data can get Calendar/Mail data for free but no one else can, then that's anti-competitive. If Google uses Chrome to recommend some random tool that's bundling. But not the thing the OP said. I don't think he's right there.
        ocdtrekkie 6y ago
        I would point out that Google believes in AMP first development, that someday websites will be AMP only even. Furthermore, Gmail supports AMP4Email now. This is one of the multiple avenues Google is rewriting the Internet to their own platforms. And the market forces I described are why businesses have to implement AMP. Eventually you and I will get pushed out.
  - AlexandrB 6y ago
    We as users are not really Google's customers. What I'm not hearing much/any of is companies reducing their adword spend or use of Google apps based on Google's business practices.
    - renewiltord 6y ago
      > If just me as a user of the platform have been feeling increasingly squeezed by AMP, more and more aggressive ads, poorer search results. Large scale data collection, the deeply troubling stance on privacy and anonymity, shouldn't there be a more collective way to say enough? Well, in that sense you don't have to be their customers. If you're subject to this then you don't have to be.
AnimalMuppet 6y ago
Yes and no. The judgment against them, requiring breakup, was overturned on appeal. But Microsoft was pretty sure that they were going to suffer a lesser penalty, so they settled the case by accepting some restrictions on their behavior, and some monitoring.

If it can be overturned with an appeal doesn't that only reinforce the underlying problem? If just me as a user of the platform have been feeling increasingly squeezed by AMP, more and more aggressive ads, poorer search results. Large scale data collection, the deeply troubling stance on privacy and anonymity, shouldn't there be a more collective way to say enough? And to just head this off: "Just switch platforms bro, there are tons of other options out there, haven't you heard of DDG?" this isn't a valid response and instinctively I know you know it to, that's why there is talk of anti-trust.

renewiltord 6y ago
Wait, why doesn't it work? I have a friend who uses Brave and DDG and all that. Brave will block the trackers but you could just as well install Chrom(e|ium) with uBlock Origin (and uMatrix if you're so inclined) and also get one of those Amp-bypass plugins.
- ocdtrekkie 6y ago
  The issue is that unless a large enough percentage of users do so, Google still controls the market, and runs the table on the other side. Google is an intermediary in the chain between other businesses which run ads and seek search placement, and consumers which see ads and look at searches. As long as Google holds 90% of the market, businesses have to advertise with Google, and websites have to cater to Google's search ranking demands. And users choosing to switch never happens in large enough quantities to change this: Almost everyone uses the default search provider. Which is why Google operates Chrome, Android, and pays for Firefox and Safari search placement. And even if half those platforms weren't first party (and monopolies in their own right), they can't get outbid easily on the other ones because, due to the existing monopoly, they have more money to bid than everyone else. Fundamentally, I think the bare minimum to handle Google is breaking Android and Chrome away from Google and prohibiting the company from operating their own browsers and operating systems. (It might also be prudent to set limits on their ability to bid for default search placement, as a way to encourage browsers to shift to a browser choice model, which would be hard to compel Firefox and Safari, in particular, to do within the confines of a suit against Google.)
  - renewiltord 6y ago
    I think that is a non-sequitur in this discussion which is about a user > If just me as a user of the platform have been feeling increasingly squeezed by AMP, more and more aggressive ads, poorer search results. Large scale data collection, the deeply troubling stance on privacy and anonymity, shouldn't there be a more collective way to say enough?
    - Avicebron 6y ago
      How is this a non-sequitur? There is a clear issue that led to a question about said issue? Issues with google, why is there not a way to solve this? Straightforward.
      - renewiltord 6y ago
        A fair question. I think it comes from the fact that: > If just me as a user of the platform have been feeling increasingly squeezed by AMP, more and more aggressive ads, poorer search results. Large scale data collection, the deeply troubling stance on privacy and anonymity, shouldn't there be a more collective way to say enough? So, we're focusing as a user here. Switching to uBlock Origin Chromium + DDG + Amp bypass extension: * Squeezed by Amp -> Solved * More and more aggressive ads -> No ads, solved * Large scale data collection -> Blocked, solved * Troubling stance on privacy and anonymity -> No data access to your data, solved > And to just head this off: "Just switch platforms bro, there are tons of other options out there, haven't you heard of DDG?" this isn't a valid response and instinctively I know you know it to, that's why there is talk of anti-trust. Everything is dodgeable as a user. Therefore it _is_ a valid response and I do not instinctively know it's not right. There are good arguments, to be clear. If most people are on Gmail and they won't access mail. If Maps data can get Calendar/Mail data for free but no one else can, then that's anti-competitive. If Google uses Chrome to recommend some random tool that's bundling. But not the thing the OP said. I don't think he's right there.
        ocdtrekkie 6y ago
        I would point out that Google believes in AMP first development, that someday websites will be AMP only even. Furthermore, Gmail supports AMP4Email now. This is one of the multiple avenues Google is rewriting the Internet to their own platforms. And the market forces I described are why businesses have to implement AMP. Eventually you and I will get pushed out.
- AlexandrB 6y ago
  We as users are not really Google's customers. What I'm not hearing much/any of is companies reducing their adword spend or use of Google apps based on Google's business practices.
  - renewiltord 6y ago
    > If just me as a user of the platform have been feeling increasingly squeezed by AMP, more and more aggressive ads, poorer search results. Large scale data collection, the deeply troubling stance on privacy and anonymity, shouldn't there be a more collective way to say enough? Well, in that sense you don't have to be their customers. If you're subject to this then you don't have to be.

AnimalMuppet 6y ago

Yes and no. The judgment against them, requiring breakup, was overturned on appeal. But Microsoft was pretty sure that they were going to suffer a lesser penalty, so they settled the case by accepting some restrictions on their behavior, and some monitoring.