4 ms·

I've seen lots of comments recently in response to the Google & Facebook advertising issues suggesting that Google should be split into X, Y, and Z. Most of th

I've seen lots of comments recently in response to the Google & Facebook advertising issues suggesting that Google should be split into X, Y, and Z. Most of the proposed splits seem like they would do absolutely nothing to address the issue at hand, though. The problem in digital advertising seems to be that Google controls the marketplace, as well as both the buy & sell sides. Even a "breaking apart" that proposes splitting "search" from "advertising" would do nothing to address the issues that are getting raised at present. I'm not an advertising expert, but these issues seem pertain to the buy-side, sell-side, and marketplace associated with digital advertising. Any company that still controls all 3 of those will retain the existing problem.

Xelbair 5y ago
I have slightly simpler proposition - ban digital advertising. Or at least ban the 'dynamic' one - the one which tries to match the user's preferences. Just static, random ads akin to TV or billboards next to the roads.
- jfoster 5y ago
  How would that address the issue of Google rigging the bidding by owning the bidding mechanism, marketplace, and managing publisher inventory? There would still be a real time auction taking place for each impression.
  - singron 5y ago
    A huge part of this document is about how Google has exclusive access to user ids. If nobody can use user ids, then they don't have those advantages anymore.
    - Xelbair 5y ago
      exactly. and it also puts the lid on profitability of walled gardens - as you cannot sell those cohorts to advertisers. It would be a net gain for society as a whole
DeathArrow 5y ago
Google should be sliced horizontally, not vertically. Each resulting company would own a percentage of current business.
- seaman1921 5y ago
  sure lets slice the computers, engineers and offices horizontally as well
  - seaman1921 5y ago
    downvote all you want but the parent comment makes no sense - you can't horizontally slice products - that would only make sense if Google had clients that could split fairly among several sub-companies. But sure keep armchairing.
    - perihelions 5y ago
      It's simple, you just have $GO deliver the left half of the searchbar while $OG handles the right.
  - msabalau 5y ago
    You say this as if it were a bad thing. And while it may be hyperbolic to literally slice engineers, anyone who engaged in a criminal conspiracy (from coder to CEO) could be tried and, if convicted, jailed. Having this happen broadly would certainly be illuminating for anyone working in this space in the future.
- jfoster 5y ago
  As a public company, it's arguably already sliced that way. What difference would it make if it's sliced further?
matheusmoreira 5y ago
Just ban advertising straight up. This will kill Google, Facebook, Twitter and all the other companies ruining the web. Not one tear will be shed at this point. Also, make it a huge liability to store any kind of personal information. Apply heavy taxes on every single bit stored. These companies should be trying really hard to forget all about us the second they send our HTTP responses, not hoarding our personal information like a bunch of stalkers. Make it exceedingly expensive for them to do it and they'll stop.
- colejohnson66 5y ago
  You know as well as I do that that will never happen and would probably destroy the economy. As bad as these companies are, flat out killing them is not a good idea.
  - matheusmoreira 5y ago
    If the economy can't survive the loss of these abusers, it deserves to be destroyed. If we do something, we gotta go all the way. Half-measures do nothing.
    - IdiocyInAction 5y ago
      You do realize what the destruction of the economy would entail? That it would mean that many people would lose their livelihood and suffer?
    - colinmhayes 5y ago
      It turns out that people actually prefer getting products for free with ads to paying for products. As bad as google and facebook are, they are providing what people want at the exact price point they want.
  - Const-me 5y ago
    I think banning online ads will be awesome for economy. Serving ads is doesn't create any value. By now, it's just a tax to be payed to google/facebook. Why do you think banning online ads gonna destroy the economy? These internet companies don't even pay a lot of taxes, we allow them to move profit across jurisdictions to optimize.
perlgeek 5y ago
> Even a "breaking apart" that proposes splitting "search" from "advertising" would do nothing to address the issues that are getting raised at present. Alone it wouldn't help, but what if you split search from advertising, and forced the "search" part to up advertising to the highest bidder, not just from google ads? If Google Search really was its own company and with its own shareholders, getting the most money for a bid would be more profitable than colluding with the rest of former Google.
TheColorYellow 5y ago
My view is that this is an issue finance has already solved. Just regulate ad exchanges for fair practice, require disclosure or transparency to identify anticompetitive behavior, and then license the fuck out of everyone who participates in the market. Seems like the industry has grown enough and clearly is suffering due to lack of sufficient management of externalities and monopoly powers. The harder part is executing on the above strategy. You will need new institutions or see an expansion or extension of existing institutions. Imagining the FCC trying to do this seems both a likely approach and an incredibly ineffective one. I would add too that improved regulation of consumer and private data would help significantly. This is probably more likely than the above. This lawsuit seems like the perfect timing and impetus to get serious about regulation in the digital ecosystem. Just hope we don't fuck it up.
- thr0wawayf00 5y ago
  > The harder part is executing on the above strategy. You will need new institutions or see an expansion or extension of existing institutions. Imagining the FCC trying to do this seems both a likely approach and an incredibly ineffective one. I completely agree and that's what scares me more and more about big tech. We let these huge companies grow for years without really considering the scalability of managing them and now we find ourselves desperately needing to regulate them but not really knowing how. It reminds me of the content moderation problem with Facebook, the cost of hiring enough humans to adequately deal with content moderation there would quite possibly bankrupt the company, and they know that. How do you find a sustainable oversight/regulatory strategy when the companies themselves were founded largely on their desire to not figure out those kinds of problems in the first place?

Xelbair 5y ago

I have slightly simpler proposition - ban digital advertising. Or at least ban the 'dynamic' one - the one which tries to match the user's preferences. Just static, random ads akin to TV or billboards next to the roads.

jfoster 5y ago
How would that address the issue of Google rigging the bidding by owning the bidding mechanism, marketplace, and managing publisher inventory? There would still be a real time auction taking place for each impression.
- singron 5y ago
  A huge part of this document is about how Google has exclusive access to user ids. If nobody can use user ids, then they don't have those advantages anymore.
  - Xelbair 5y ago
    exactly. and it also puts the lid on profitability of walled gardens - as you cannot sell those cohorts to advertisers. It would be a net gain for society as a whole

DeathArrow 5y ago

Google should be sliced horizontally, not vertically. Each resulting company would own a percentage of current business.

seaman1921 5y ago
sure lets slice the computers, engineers and offices horizontally as well
- seaman1921 5y ago
  downvote all you want but the parent comment makes no sense - you can't horizontally slice products - that would only make sense if Google had clients that could split fairly among several sub-companies. But sure keep armchairing.
  - perihelions 5y ago
    It's simple, you just have $GO deliver the left half of the searchbar while $OG handles the right.
- msabalau 5y ago
  You say this as if it were a bad thing. And while it may be hyperbolic to literally slice engineers, anyone who engaged in a criminal conspiracy (from coder to CEO) could be tried and, if convicted, jailed. Having this happen broadly would certainly be illuminating for anyone working in this space in the future.
jfoster 5y ago
As a public company, it's arguably already sliced that way. What difference would it make if it's sliced further?

matheusmoreira 5y ago

Just ban advertising straight up. This will kill Google, Facebook, Twitter and all the other companies ruining the web. Not one tear will be shed at this point. Also, make it a huge liability to store any kind of personal information. Apply heavy taxes on every single bit stored. These companies should be trying really hard to forget all about us the second they send our HTTP responses, not hoarding our personal information like a bunch of stalkers. Make it exceedingly expensive for them to do it and they'll stop.

colejohnson66 5y ago
You know as well as I do that that will never happen and would probably destroy the economy. As bad as these companies are, flat out killing them is not a good idea.
- matheusmoreira 5y ago
  If the economy can't survive the loss of these abusers, it deserves to be destroyed. If we do something, we gotta go all the way. Half-measures do nothing.
  - IdiocyInAction 5y ago
    You do realize what the destruction of the economy would entail? That it would mean that many people would lose their livelihood and suffer?
  - colinmhayes 5y ago
    It turns out that people actually prefer getting products for free with ads to paying for products. As bad as google and facebook are, they are providing what people want at the exact price point they want.
- Const-me 5y ago
  I think banning online ads will be awesome for economy. Serving ads is doesn't create any value. By now, it's just a tax to be payed to google/facebook. Why do you think banning online ads gonna destroy the economy? These internet companies don't even pay a lot of taxes, we allow them to move profit across jurisdictions to optimize.

perlgeek 5y ago

> Even a "breaking apart" that proposes splitting "search" from "advertising" would do nothing to address the issues that are getting raised at present. Alone it wouldn't help, but what if you split search from advertising, and forced the "search" part to up advertising to the highest bidder, not just from google ads? If Google Search really was its own company and with its own shareholders, getting the most money for a bid would be more profitable than colluding with the rest of former Google.

TheColorYellow 5y ago

My view is that this is an issue finance has already solved. Just regulate ad exchanges for fair practice, require disclosure or transparency to identify anticompetitive behavior, and then license the fuck out of everyone who participates in the market. Seems like the industry has grown enough and clearly is suffering due to lack of sufficient management of externalities and monopoly powers. The harder part is executing on the above strategy. You will need new institutions or see an expansion or extension of existing institutions. Imagining the FCC trying to do this seems both a likely approach and an incredibly ineffective one. I would add too that improved regulation of consumer and private data would help significantly. This is probably more likely than the above. This lawsuit seems like the perfect timing and impetus to get serious about regulation in the digital ecosystem. Just hope we don't fuck it up.

thr0wawayf00 5y ago
> The harder part is executing on the above strategy. You will need new institutions or see an expansion or extension of existing institutions. Imagining the FCC trying to do this seems both a likely approach and an incredibly ineffective one. I completely agree and that's what scares me more and more about big tech. We let these huge companies grow for years without really considering the scalability of managing them and now we find ourselves desperately needing to regulate them but not really knowing how. It reminds me of the content moderation problem with Facebook, the cost of hiring enough humans to adequately deal with content moderation there would quite possibly bankrupt the company, and they know that. How do you find a sustainable oversight/regulatory strategy when the companies themselves were founded largely on their desire to not figure out those kinds of problems in the first place?