Hacker News Reader

Comment by icarus_drowning | Hacker News Reader

There is not a single example of "deceptive practices" in the article, merely supposed "evidence" that those practices are likely. Whether or not that is true, without any example to point to, the article is entirely evidence-free.

We have a word for that: it is screed. That's all this article really is. One of the worst OP's I've ever read on HN.

View on HN

It's an interesting OP in the sense that it shows that some big players are trying to brew up trouble for Google using antitrust mechanisms. The screed itself is not very informative (it's an attack piece by a lawyer for the other side). Now, I would like to understand who "the other side" really is, and to get an evaluation of what they hope to gain and what their chances are. It doesn't seem that the other side is competing search engines, probably more like competing advertisers.

I have to admit, I don't find it very "interesting" at all. I find it irritating and sophomoric.

I'm very sympathetic to Google, but I do believe that they are entering dangerous territory as they become more and more dominant. So I would like to see a serious critique of their policies and practices.

This is not it.

I find it interesting not in the sense of "I thank them for sharing their wisdom with me", but in the sense of "look what's massing on the horizon".

And as for Google's policies in practices, as users of their consumer products, we're exposed to just one side of it. The money-making side of their business is advertising, and they tend to be less of a "nice guy" about that. Now, I have no idea how they compare with other advertising companies; whoever hired the "consultant" that wrote the OP is also playing hardball.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com