Hacker News Reader

Comment by asdfasgasdgasdg | Hacker News Reader

Wouldn’t it be really good for google if the DOJ banned paying for default placement? I mean it seems like an untenable result to say that anyone but google can pay for default placement. So if paying for default is not okay, then that just saves google a lot of money (since google knows most people will pick them if presented a slate of options).

View on HN

If they knew most people would pick them, then why are they paying?

Most people would pick Google if there was no default option.

Most people don’t change the default option though. If Google didn’t (or couldn’t by law) pay such large sums, someone else (e.g. Bing) would pay a bit less and become the default. Even though most people prefer Google over Bing, there is still a significant incumbent advantage for being the default option.

And because little old Microsoft couldn’t afford to pay Apple to be the default search engine?

Well, no. They did pay to become the default and I guess it was a big enough hit to Google that Google opened the pocketbook.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/17/09/25/apple-switches-fr...

To prevent their competitors for making deals to be the default.

Bingo. Google is less paying for default placement and more paying so that they aren’t locked out by default.

Because Apple is extorting them.

There's a difference in exclusive dealing by a market leader and by a new entrant.

Of course, if and as a new entrant garners increased share, rules should change to reflect that.

The problem is that market dominance tends to be a positive feedback loop, for reasons not associated with actual product superiority. Ultimately it quashes choice, competition, new innovation, and the like.

Current US antitrust legal theory mostly ignores this based on the Bork / Posner / Director (all Chicago School) tradition. See Cory Doctorow's new book Chokepoint Capitalism for a revised take: <https://doctorow.medium.com/what-is-chokepoint-capitalism-b8...>

What would a fair default option be?

Either letting the user choose, or the developers setting a default (ideally with the interests of their users in mind). Of course, the latter is subject to interpretation, and a privacy-focused application might make a different choice than standard consumer products.

Any choice made that doesn't involve a kickback.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com