3 ms·

It's pretty scary how much Google controls the internet. I wish Bing or Yahoo or DuckDuckGo weren't so much worse than Google, or I'd happily use them.

captainmuon 13y ago
Give me just 20-30 million dollars, legal protection from any patent claims, and (providing my search engine works well technically) make it the default in a small percentage of all Firefox installs. What I'm trying to say is, Google doesn't have the monopoly because they're the only ones who can build a good search engine. The have the monopoly because they do have good technology, but also because of path dependence, and because there is no political effort to build up a competitor. I already posted a couple of days ago, there are a bunch of ways governments could support competitors when one search engine controls a large fraction of the market, say more than 2/3. For example a special monopoly tax, subsidies for competitors, etc. One thing I think would be nice is to make search engines offer a free/very cheap API (as long as they have > XX % market share). Anybody can come along and build a Google + Bing + Pokemon-Wiki meta search engine. If you tune it to be profitable, you'll have a lot of competing search engine frontends spring up. But you'll also have a lot of search engine backends (and not just Bing, Google, and Yandex), because its suddenly profitable to build verticals (e.g. indexing just tech news or recipies), which require less resources technically - because the vertical backends get traffic through the competing frontends. And I could choose a frontend that gives me Google-like searches, or one that interprets terms more literal (like when you use +"term" in Google), which would be great for programming related stuff. There could be another one focussing on social media, or local stuff, etc..

3 ms·

It's pretty scary how much Google controls the internet. I wish Bing or Yahoo or DuckDuckGo weren't so much worse than Google, or I'd happily use them.

by brianpgordon 13y ago

captainmuon 13y ago
Give me just 20-30 million dollars, legal protection from any patent claims, and (providing my search engine works well technically) make it the default in a small percentage of all Firefox installs. What I'm trying to say is, Google doesn't have the monopoly because they're the only ones who can build a good search engine. The have the monopoly because they do have good technology, but also because of path dependence, and because there is no political effort to build up a competitor. I already posted a couple of days ago, there are a bunch of ways governments could support competitors when one search engine controls a large fraction of the market, say more than 2/3. For example a special monopoly tax, subsidies for competitors, etc. One thing I think would be nice is to make search engines offer a free/very cheap API (as long as they have > XX % market share). Anybody can come along and build a Google + Bing + Pokemon-Wiki meta search engine. If you tune it to be profitable, you'll have a lot of competing search engine frontends spring up. But you'll also have a lot of search engine backends (and not just Bing, Google, and Yandex), because its suddenly profitable to build verticals (e.g. indexing just tech news or recipies), which require less resources technically - because the vertical backends get traffic through the competing frontends. And I could choose a frontend that gives me Google-like searches, or one that interprets terms more literal (like when you use +"term" in Google), which would be great for programming related stuff. There could be another one focussing on social media, or local stuff, etc..