7 ms·

>EU is “concerned that Google has made it harder for rival online advertising services to compete in the so-called ad tech stack.” There are plenty of competit

• brap 3y ago
  EU is repeatedly shooting itself in the foot. Same old story.
  • hef19898 3y ago
    So, you are saying, the most advanced tech out there, the on the EU wont have, is ad tech? Well, I don't really see the problem with that.
    • throw140623 3y ago
      [flagged]
• senttoschool 3y ago
  Well said. Europe creates a high amount of regulation. The startup industry gets completely stifled and unable to compete with US nor China. So all they do now is add more regulation.
  • emanuele232 3y ago
    profit is the most important thing in history ?
    • Aunche 3y ago
      You'd think as such if you're observing the EU. They happily encourage monopolies that they profit from like LVMH and Luxottica.
      • delfinom 3y ago
        The EU doesn't want to talk about it's own monopolies. ASML is a funny one too, the EU gets to "have it", but the US gets to use sanctions to control it.
      • emanuele232 3y ago
        well, not questioning that the market makers are not encouraged to make the market "fair", they wants to make the market "favorable" for its own people but i see a difference between companies that sell luxury goods (not relevant for humanity) and companies that permeates every single aspect of your life, mostly in sublte and sketchy ways, selling data of people that don't even know they generate.
      • gerash 3y ago
        Exactly, Luxottica is the worst: See this 60 min talk from a decade ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDdq2rIqAlM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDdq2rIqAlM but that does not bother EC apparently.
• jacooper 3y ago
  Yes, and that's great. They don't want surveillance Capitalism.
  • Aunche 3y ago
    One of my friends works for a European adtech company. Unlike the companies I mentioned above, they don't do anything except manage online ads for brands. After iOS and Android enhanced their privacy settings, they lost a substantial portion of their business. I'm guessing that this is the type of business that the EU is trying to protect.
  • aurareturn 3y ago
    99% of the people don't care. That's why there are 2.1 billion people on Facebook. Without surveillance capitalism, prices for services would go up or would cease to be free. The ad-driven business model is a legitimate one. I assume that you use a free service from Google/Facebook/Microsoft? So you must not care about surveillance capitalism either. At least not care enough.
    • veave 3y ago
      [flagged]
    • piva00 3y ago
      > I assume that you use a free service from Google/Facebook/Microsoft? So you must not care about surveillance capitalism either. At least not care enough. This happens exactly because there is no competition and hence antitrust is needed. I don't want to be using services from Google/Facebook/Microsoft but there's no competition and then I end up using their services even when trying to avoid it as most as possible... If the prices for services would go up without surveillance capitalism so be it, that's the real price, I want to choose to pay for it, not be coerced into giving them my data for their "free" services. I don't have that option right now, nor anyone else, why are you against freedom of choice?
      • aurareturn 3y ago
• bbor 3y ago
  Read it more carefully :) google has no (meaningful) competitors in the Ad Exchange business. Isn’t that some bullshit??
  • Aunche 3y ago
    Fair enough. This does sound like a more reasonable concern than their other antitrust fines. To be fair, this article does a very poor job of explaining by conflating "Google's ad business" with AdX.
• megous 3y ago
  One problem with your argument is that EU is not a country.
• nova22033 3y ago
  EU gave us the "Accept all cookies" button.
  • throw140623 3y ago
    [flagged]