3 ms·

Same way it worked in the past with monopolies like Ma Bell? Those teams can keep working on Chrome, they'll just have to fall under some new kind of separate

by crote 2y ago

Same way it worked in the past with monopolies like Ma Bell? Those teams can keep working on Chrome, they'll just have to fall under some new kind of separate Chrome Inc. structure instead of under Google Inc., and Google will have to sell most of its shares of Chrome Inc. to third parties. Splitting off Chrome really isn't the problem. Making the new Chrome Inc. profitable without accepting bribes from big tech, on the other hand...

loeg 2y ago
Yes, that's sort of the problem. An independent Chrome probably wouldn't be profitable. This is essentially just forcing Google to fire the Chrome developers.
- Clubber 2y ago
  >This is essentially just forcing Google to fire the Chrome developers. To be fair, Google could reassign them to something else. Firing everybody will be Google's decision that wasn't forced on them.
  - loeg 2y ago
    I don't really know if they would be allowed to divest the IP but retain the developers. Maybe!
    - asadotzler 2y ago
      Of course they could. They could just cancel Chrome, shut the whole browser down and reassign all the staff, and the DOJ would be fine with that. Cancelling it, or selling while keeping 100% of the employees are in no way counter to the proposed remedies.
      - loeg 2y ago
        We don’t know what proposals the court will accept.
        asadotzler 2y ago
        We know what outcomes the DOJ is proposing and might proopose, so we can make pretty good guesses.
- phkahler 2y ago
  Microsoft has a customized version of Chrome. Don't they already pay for it?
  - DoctorOW 2y ago
    Yeah, I could imagine Microsoft making a bid. To people who don't follow tech product ownership, "Windows comes with Chrome instead of Edge" would be good PR and it could basically be Edge minus the rebranding.
    - forgotTheLast 2y ago
      Would love if that also meant no more shovelware features to try and distinguish Edge from Chrome.
    - AJ007 2y ago
      Thinking about what companies have the adtech infrastructure to buy Chrome and make enough money the justify a bid high enough than Google just shutting it down: Microsoft, Meta/Facebook, Bytedance? I don't see a real need for Chrome. The stuff they've done to break Adblocking makes it pretty much a dead project today. Web browser development should be open source and not for profit. There is a fair argument that it has been because of Google's funding. There's a strong argument that Chrome has existed to further Google's business and at a minimum protect it's business and ensure third parties didn't hijack all of their PPC revenue in the early days. It is easy to foresee an outcome here where someone politically connected gets a hold of Chrome and does a lot of crap they shouldn't. The worst case outcome is unrelated to any of this, and something where we end up with government mandated garbage in a web browser. It is very possible that DRM and biometric age verification, and who the fuck knows what else thanks to AI, could be required either by the US or EU, and kill the open source web browser. That's worse than anything Google did.
    - 3vidence 2y ago
      This is just handing over a dominant market to another company that has already been sued for anti competitive practices in the exact same space. Make it make sense
- stefan_ 2y ago
  I love how people in this thread just unilaterally declare and accept as fact that you can't possibly turn the monopolistic browser and browser engine powering millions of devices and with billions of users into a profitable business. Aim low I guess?
  - mattlondon 2y ago
    So please enlighten us, how will someone make money from the free product that is free and no one pays for because it is free? Selling user browser data obviously won't fly (and note that Google has never explicitly nor directly sold user's browsing data as far as I know, but they do have a huge ad network that utilises cookies...), so what's the plan? Put ads in the browser? "Premium" features? The only thing I can think of is highjacking links to Amazon et al to insert referral codes en masse, or selling links/ads on new tab pages.
    - asadotzler 2y ago
      Why won't selling data fly? Why not sell premium features? Why not add affiliate codes to links? Why not sell ads on new tab pages? All of these are fine examples of how a not-Google Chrome could make money. They could even get paid by Microsoft or some other not-Google search for that traffic. This isn't hard unless you're trying to make it hard to convince us all we should just give up and let Google continue running our online lives through monopolization.
      - magicalist 2y ago
        > Why won't selling data fly? > Why not sell premium features? > Why not add affiliate codes to links? > Why not sell ads on new tab pages? Ah yes, would love more of all this in my browser.
      - creato 2y ago
        You're making a great case for why most people should prefer chrome to remain a google product.
      - 2y ago

by crote 2y ago

loeg 2y ago

Yes, that's sort of the problem. An independent Chrome probably wouldn't be profitable. This is essentially just forcing Google to fire the Chrome developers.

Clubber 2y ago
>This is essentially just forcing Google to fire the Chrome developers. To be fair, Google could reassign them to something else. Firing everybody will be Google's decision that wasn't forced on them.
- loeg 2y ago
  I don't really know if they would be allowed to divest the IP but retain the developers. Maybe!
  - asadotzler 2y ago
    Of course they could. They could just cancel Chrome, shut the whole browser down and reassign all the staff, and the DOJ would be fine with that. Cancelling it, or selling while keeping 100% of the employees are in no way counter to the proposed remedies.
    - loeg 2y ago
      We don’t know what proposals the court will accept.
      - asadotzler 2y ago
        We know what outcomes the DOJ is proposing and might proopose, so we can make pretty good guesses.
phkahler 2y ago
Microsoft has a customized version of Chrome. Don't they already pay for it?
- DoctorOW 2y ago
  Yeah, I could imagine Microsoft making a bid. To people who don't follow tech product ownership, "Windows comes with Chrome instead of Edge" would be good PR and it could basically be Edge minus the rebranding.
  - forgotTheLast 2y ago
    Would love if that also meant no more shovelware features to try and distinguish Edge from Chrome.
  - AJ007 2y ago
    Thinking about what companies have the adtech infrastructure to buy Chrome and make enough money the justify a bid high enough than Google just shutting it down: Microsoft, Meta/Facebook, Bytedance? I don't see a real need for Chrome. The stuff they've done to break Adblocking makes it pretty much a dead project today. Web browser development should be open source and not for profit. There is a fair argument that it has been because of Google's funding. There's a strong argument that Chrome has existed to further Google's business and at a minimum protect it's business and ensure third parties didn't hijack all of their PPC revenue in the early days. It is easy to foresee an outcome here where someone politically connected gets a hold of Chrome and does a lot of crap they shouldn't. The worst case outcome is unrelated to any of this, and something where we end up with government mandated garbage in a web browser. It is very possible that DRM and biometric age verification, and who the fuck knows what else thanks to AI, could be required either by the US or EU, and kill the open source web browser. That's worse than anything Google did.
  - 3vidence 2y ago
    This is just handing over a dominant market to another company that has already been sued for anti competitive practices in the exact same space. Make it make sense
stefan_ 2y ago
I love how people in this thread just unilaterally declare and accept as fact that you can't possibly turn the monopolistic browser and browser engine powering millions of devices and with billions of users into a profitable business. Aim low I guess?
- mattlondon 2y ago
  So please enlighten us, how will someone make money from the free product that is free and no one pays for because it is free? Selling user browser data obviously won't fly (and note that Google has never explicitly nor directly sold user's browsing data as far as I know, but they do have a huge ad network that utilises cookies...), so what's the plan? Put ads in the browser? "Premium" features? The only thing I can think of is highjacking links to Amazon et al to insert referral codes en masse, or selling links/ads on new tab pages.
  - asadotzler 2y ago
    Why won't selling data fly? Why not sell premium features? Why not add affiliate codes to links? Why not sell ads on new tab pages? All of these are fine examples of how a not-Google Chrome could make money. They could even get paid by Microsoft or some other not-Google search for that traffic. This isn't hard unless you're trying to make it hard to convince us all we should just give up and let Google continue running our online lives through monopolization.
    - magicalist 2y ago
      > Why won't selling data fly? > Why not sell premium features? > Why not add affiliate codes to links? > Why not sell ads on new tab pages? Ah yes, would love more of all this in my browser.
    - creato 2y ago
      You're making a great case for why most people should prefer chrome to remain a google product.
    - 2y ago