Ask HN: Why do we allow Google's abuse? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Why do we allow Google's abuse?

10 pointsluttermigg10 comments

Perhaps this is a strange question, but I feel it merits discussion.

Just a couple examples that come to mind, the full list is almost endless:

- Chrome's preferential treatment of addons that don't attack Google's ads aggressively (e.g., addon adnauseam is banned from Chrome)

- ReCaptcha's ridiculous gaslighting on non-Chrome browsers, especially Firefox, where it takes minutes to complete while it takes seconds on Chrome. Sometimes it's so slow that it forces you to reload the page and start from scratch.

- Google's invasion of privacy all over, where to even begin..

- The persistent insistence of all Google services for you to switch to Chrome, with the dubious at best claim that it is "faster, more secure, and more private" than other browsers.

- The deliberate malfunction of Google services on non-Chrome browsers, including deliberate poor performance and loading times.

I do have studies and articles to back up all of the above, I'll link it if you can't find it by searching.

So why is it that Google can do this without punishment? This is a literal monopoly that reinforces its own power and sabotages competition.

I'm starting to move off the Google ecosystem. Got an iPhone, using duckduckgo, moved to Firefox (which is much better). Currently looking for a replacement for Gmail, willing to pay.

A lot of their products are becoming poor quality - hangouts, Docs, Chrome are all sluggish. Google itself is a great website, but they're not too far ahead of Bing or DDG.

I've cut Google out in all areas except where the product is, IMO, best-in-class: search, Android, YouTube, and g-board. I think most people believe they don't have anything to hide, which is why, even when confronted with the extent of information Google and others have on them, they shrug their shoulders.

As someone who has been using chrome extensively it’s also denial of the fact that I’m having a life-long, interconnected, searchable dossier built and the emotional discomfort of the total freakout of facing this fact.

I considered a longer comment describing some scenarios but deleted it before posting.

So, this particular kind of oppression is already resulting in self-censorship for me personally.

This is a good talk on why privacy matters: https://www.ted.com/talks/glenn_greenwald_why_privacy_matter...

A few years back Google was the #1 spender on lobbying.

Google has fought a hard game against copyright holders. Conglomerates that could use anybody else to oblivion have accepted a situation where, on a given day, you might find anything at all on YouTube.

It is a lack of competition, but also a collapse of alternative business models.

As long as you, the consumer, use "free" gmail instead of paying for an alternative, you enable perverse incentives where you are the product, be it just stagnation or some story out of "black mirror."

there's also Android's troubling anticompetitive behavior against SkyHook location provider:

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2010/09/skyhook-google-m...

and the restrictive conditions imposed on android OEMs:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/02/new-android-oem-lice...

What do you mean punishment? Don't like it don't use it. Advocate for others not to use it, do something. People expecting corporations and the government to solve their problems are a problem themselves.

This is crazy to me. Why are people so obsessed with fighting a company that has made all of our lives better with amazing free email, search, maps and other services in only twenty years?

Why doesn't HN have the courage to go after MBS who murders journalists, or Putin who invaded the Crimea and attacked free elections everywhere? Come on people get your priorities straightened out.

For one, HackerNews is a tech discussion board - so many of the contributors are probably more intimately familiar with issues in the technology world than in the civil rights world especially in countries outside of 1st world software/tech producing countries.

I don't see anything wrong with going after Google, as they have time and time again lied to customers and taken advantage of customers with help from our legal system.

Both are bad, but one is easier for technophiles to discuss and brainstorm than the other I would guess.

> Why doesn't HN have the courage to go after MBS who murders journalists, or Putin who invaded the Crimea and attacked free elections everywhere? Come on people get your priorities straightened out.

well some did, they're gone now

Edit: but on a more on-topic note, because I like using Firefox and don't want to be forced to use Chrome.

There's a fine line between 'muh muh big corporation bad derp' and not wanting to become a helpless subject to our corporate overlords.

The discussion is not going after the positive contributions of the company but after its insidious shadowy practices of collecting personal data forever.

Asking what about unrelated x, y or z is a frequent pattern of “whataboutism” used to derail conversations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com