3 ms·
I find it curious that these cases are only being heard now, given that we are starting to see competitors like ChatGPT, DuckDuckGo, amongst others. Seems a bit
by TriangleEdge 3y ago
I find it curious that these cases are only being heard now, given that we are starting to see competitors like ChatGPT, DuckDuckGo, amongst others. Seems a bit late to me. I personally find the quality of Google to have nose dived in the last 5 years. It feels to me like something along the lines of a 'wordiness' score got added to their algorithm, which I dislike. Every time I search for a recipe, I am presented with a document about the history of the potato, then the recipe, which I find super annoying. My wish is to have a no BS search, which cuts out the wordiness and gets to the point.
- Bjartr 3y agoHave you taken a look at Kagi? I've been pretty happy with them compared to Google lately.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- SllX 3y agoThat’s kind of the fundamental issue with antitrust law. By the time you’re in court, the case is already pretty much irrelevant to the addressable market the prosecution is representing. The fear is that someone will dominate a market so thoroughly that they will never have any real competition from an alternative. When you were talking about railroad rights of way and maybe a finite number of salt mines, I mean, fair enough. But now we fly over those rights of way and finding new places to get mineral resources is generally not that difficult because we either find new physical locations or we develop new technologies to re-exploit sites that were thought to be tapped out (and technically were with just older technology). Plus with electrification we’ve figured out new ways to get large quantities of energy other than drilling for oil. How do you even define a market for search, when what people were really after was what search engines could get them and there are more ways than ever to get that now?