12 ms·
U.S. asks Google for detailed search data in antitrust case
- whatgoodisaroad 6y agoI'm torn between whether I should distrust this site because it's pretending to be associated with Bloomberg ... or if I should distrust this website because it may actually be associated with Bloomberg.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Sephr 6y agoLooks like they have a co-branding partnership: https://twitter.com/MikeBloomberg/status/986771282137157632 https://twitter.com/MikeBloomberg/status/986771282137157632
- detaro 6y agoIt's not pretending: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BNN_Bloomberg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BNN_Bloomberg
- ocdtrekkie 6y ago...Is there something factually questionable about this article that would cause you to have suspicions, or is this solely a desire to trash a media outlet you don't like? Beyond the fact that it isn't "pretending" to be associated with Bloomberg, as another commenter points out, I hardly see anything controversial in the reporting that the DOJ has requested information from Google.
- whatgoodisaroad 6y agoNo, I'll grant you it's nothing about the content of the article, but rather I don't trust the Bloomberg brand after their handling of the Big Hack story.
- xiphias2 6y agoI have problems with many things that Google is doing, but making Google the default search engine everywhere is not one of them.
- unyttigfjelltol 6y agoDoes this mean the content of Google searches now will be sent directly to the U.S. gov't and state gov'ts? It seems like the kind of privacy intrusion that would concern everyday people.
- ses1984 6y agoThey aren't already?
- stjohnswarts 6y agoNo they aren't, and unless you have proof that they do it's a conspiracy theory on the level of aliens and the Rothschild Illuminati.
- im3w1l 6y agoDo you want some real paranoia fuel? Foreign governments are likely to have moles with log access.
- juanani 6y agoPRISM should be enough proof, doubt we will see anymore. What's all this concern about the Annunaki?
- gens 6y agoRoom 641A is a similar thing.
- _jal 6y agoIs true. And there is more that can't be proven. But it is also true that Google and ATT are very different companies. The Snowden leaks lead Google to encrypt internal links, once they realized NSA were tapping them; ATT built NSA Room 641A. But this is rather more complicated than that; I'd bet money there are are people employed at Google who wear more than one hat[1], as there have been at tech companies throughout the history of Silicon Valley. And practices at Google makes NSA's life easier - Organizing the World's Advertising Targets is actually a remarkably compatible goal.
- jeffbee 6y agoLOL 30 days. Even a Googler who wanted that data would be waiting a minimum of half a year before anyone from the logs access rotation even glanced at their ticket. Plus, one wonders if Google even holds the data the US government is requesting. Plusplus, I hate it when "granular" is used as if it has a direction, which it does not. Are the feds asking for fine-grained data, or coarse-grained data?
- Black101 6y ago> Plus, one wonders if Google even holds the data the US government is requesting. lol... I don't wonder this at all... but either ways, the government could potentially get it in real time (like the NSA, today).
- fdcvcx 6y ago“Even a Googler who wanted that data would be waiting a minimum of half a year before anyone from the logs access rotation even glanced at their ticket.“ Good for the Googler, patience is a virtue. A US Judge [1] with an order outranks Schmidt and the bratty twins. The logs folks get 30 days to comply or they get thrown in jail for contempt of court. [1] unfortunately just the US. And China. China doesn’t even need a judge’s order. A rude tweet from a minor official at the San Fran consulate and Alphabet bends over.
- detaro 6y ago> Even[!] a Googler It's an interesting world view where being a random Googler apparently suggests higher priority than a DOJ request.
- erhk 6y agoThey left out the caveat of with business and production need and VP and driector approval but it kills the theme of the message to enumerate all of the classifiers. Moving that much sensitive data is a big task with invokves many interested parties.
- maximente 6y agonah, the DC office's tech talent ain't bad, although like most engineers they're not the best at efficiently communicating technical stuff to, say, staff lawyers
- endisneigh 6y agoFor the sake of discussion let's just say Google is broken up. Let's also say that it's broken up such that Google Search, Google Ads, and YouTube are separate entities (among others). In this new broken up set of companies, what's stopping them from remerging like Bell? Also, what's stopping them from giving each other favorable partnerships? Personally I find this entire exercise a waste of time - rather than break up Google we should just acknowledge that certain industries have certain types of attributes that result in necessarily "anti-competitive" behavior. In Google's case, since it's an internet company I would say the more users it has the harder it is to beat - with that being said they should just create some sort of progressive taxation as a function of users. Your users in the USA equal 90%+ of the country, you are subject to rules A. Your users in the USA equal to <10%? You are subject to rules B and are subsidized directly by those whose users equal 90%+. If all companies are less than 50% than we use rules c, for example. The same logic could be used for manufacturing, utilities, internet providers, and more.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- xapata 6y agoIt's important to note that there are a handful of negative externalities created by market dominance. Even if it's not anticompetitive, it still creates systemic risk. The blast radius of an AWS outage is quite large. The tax should be proportional to the systemic risk created. This holds for tariffs as well. If we are overly reliant on imported facemasks, we should tax them to subsidize a small amount of domestic production in case of catastrophe.
- latch 6y agoAWS is a poor example because they aren't remotely close to having the market dominance of Google. They are more like McDonalds: a huge fish in an ocean. AWS is huge in a segment (cloud) of the industry, but that segment represents a very small % of the overall industry.
- 6y ago
- tyingq 6y agoShould be interesting to compare to the internally squashed FTC report here: http://graphics.wsj.com/google-ftc-report/ http://graphics.wsj.com/google-ftc-report/
- williesleg 6y agoYay data!
- brainwad 6y agoIf Google is prohibited from paying for default search engine status, because it is judged a monopoly, will that condemn us all to default Yahoo or Bing, like Firefox tried a few years ago? Google should at least be able to match the top bid of its competitors, so that device manufaturers / browser developers can make a pro-user choice (i.e. Google) without losing revenue.
- killingtime74 6y agoYou’re asking a question that will only be answered at the end of a long sequence of litigation by judge(s). That is if it is not settled first. Most likely we will never know.
- eejjjj82 6y agoyou mean .... will that condemn users to manually switch their default search engine to Google? if so, then maybe that's a good thing. also, with Duck Duck Go (and I assume others) I think it's more than debatable that Google is the defacto "pro-user" choice
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- iDATATi 6y agoI'm looking for some badass engineers to join our team to create something that is going to take over the advertising model. YES, its true and it has tobe done.... Want to be part of changing the world?
- yawaworht1978 6y agoI think the government is requesting a date range simply to compare the data to what they already think to know.
- dalbasal 6y agoWhat's the goal or endgame for these antitrust cases... If antitrust is entirely delegated to courts, it's hard to see how it ever becomes more than a "compliance" issue. Fines and/or mandatory adjustments to current MOs. That's hardly trustbusting. The big pieces aren't a secret. Market share, the big competitive dynamics, income streams and overall structure of the search-ads "industry" and its adjacent, also Google dominated markets like android, youtube and chrome. How is a judge supposed to decide what to do about all this... Seems like the wrong tool for the job.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoThe goal is to make Google produce evidence in a way that wouldn’t be appropriate outside the context of a court case. Antitrust lawsuits inevitably end with a policy-driven settlement between the target and the DOJ, although the court can in principle order a breakup as they initially did in the Microsoft case.