Hacker News Reader

Comment by gman83 | Hacker News Reader

So what's the remedy, separate companies for Search, Ads, Youtube, Cloud/Firebase, GSuite, Android/Chrome, Pixel, Maps?

The best divide is actually far less aggressive: Platforms should be split from services. Android and Chrome are IMHO the primary things Google should be forced to divest.

I am not sure you could (or even should) split Search and Ads, but there may need to be some significant rules laid down on Google's ability to tie their other products and services to search. Strict rules should be laid down on allowing ads to sell placement above trademark holders for their own trademark, as that kind of shakedown is insane.

The best move would be to revert the Doubleclick acquisition and spin out the AdTech part as its own separate entity.

But also make Google Search an open auction system (like it sort of is on Display) where other players can integrate with and Google (search) takes a fixed % for each click. Pipe dream I suppose but best way to avoid Google from being able to be truly dominant.

How does bidding for search result position not make the results anything but an add auction?

If I'm Result Source X, why would I ever bid on answering an unprofitable search, even if I know the answer?

This is a great idea.

Bidding on trademarks has nothing to do with antitrust. If I can place a billboard for BMW next to a Lexus dealership, there is no reason I should not be able to show a BMW ad to somebody searching for Lexus or visiting a Lexus blog.

That would never work because only one of those things is profitable, the Ads. I guess also Cloud can be profitable.

Many of these products already carry ads or would be a convenient place to put ads, even if they'd have to be bought for each product individually. Also the Pixel stuff is very pricy for hardware that isn't top of the line.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com