Google Pays $10B a Year to Maintain Monopoly, US Says | Hacker News Reader

Google Pays $10B a Year to Maintain Monopoly, US Says

bloomberg.com

60 pointsgp23 comments

I'm struck by how much this seems to parallel the Microsoft DOJ case of 2001.[1]

At the time, Microsoft was bundling IE and trying to block use of other browsers. However, the browser wasn't really where the value was, and we all ended up with Chrome, while Microsoft completely missed the internet era and lost search to Google.

I find the timing of this interesting as we are seeing a shift to AI being able to answer the questions that Google once provided, and now the DOJ is saying Google blocking other search engines is anti-competitive, when that game has already been played, and the next game has already started.

Am I thinking of this correctly? Or do you think if Microsoft had been able to maintain IE dominance (which it kinda did until Chrome anyway) the internet would have ended up being shaped significantly differently?

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....

> Or do you think if Microsoft had been able to maintain IE dominance (which it kinda did until Chrome anyway) the internet would have ended up being shaped significantly differently?

The IE engine was quirky, and it was common for webdevs to only target IE. I think there was a real danger that a large portion of the web was going to be IE only, vendor locking everyone.

I think ultimately iPhone/Android did as much to break this as Google Chrome did, as all the eyeballs went to from desktops/laptops to smartphones. Google Chrome was released after the iPhone.

You're right. I totally agree with you. I think it goes further to prove the point that DOJ is trying to stop people from stealing horses 10 years after the automobile had been invented.

Lately I have found Google to be a less reliable search engine when compared to a few years ago. Whether I am trying to find an old meme, a piece of research or even googling errors it seems like the results are never what I am looking for. And it's not just SEO spamming since things like software errors are not something people try and game. It used to be I would paste in an error and I would get a Git Issues result for exactly what I was looking for, but now I just go to GitHub or Stack Overflow directly.

I've been finding ChatGPT to be more reliable at pointing me in the right direction than either Google or Bing in a lot of cases lately. And don't even get me started on how YouTube search is beyond useless

I think there are two use cases for search engine, to find an answer and to find a site. ChatGPT is good for the former and useless for the latter. Google is okay at the former and good at the latter (but getting worse). Big advantage of Google is that there are sources for more detail.

For example, I'm looking at sleeping pads for camping. If I type "sleeping pad" in ChatGPT, it tells me what a sleeping pad is. If I type it into Google, it lists products, places to buy them, and some reviews. If I type "best sleeping pads", ChatGPT gives me a list but without details or sources. If I type into Google, I get a list of reviews which I have to read but has context.

I get the differences in how they work. To that, I think your example is too simple and conclusions far too hasty on ChatGPT's capabilities. It is far from useless when it comes to finding relevant websites

Following your example, I queried it with "Where can I buy a sleeping pad online?" and it listed several options, starting with specific ones (Amazon, REI, Backcountry), then got more generalized (Camping and Outdoor Gear Websites, Specialized Brands, Large Retailers, Online Marketplaces). I told it to list the websites of the specialized brands and it gave me links to four retailers (thermarest.com, bigagnes.com, seatosummitusa.com, and nemoequipment.com)

Yeah I have noticed youtube search is bad - the only time it gives me what I want is if I search for something I have watched previously - Discovery is totally useless.

It also seems that search results are extremely limited. 5(?) years ago you would get pages of stuff that is tangentially related. Now it's 2 pages that seem carefully curated, but that's exactly the problem - you get a curated list, rather than a search of the whole web.

I've switched to Kagi + Yandex. Together they provide all the results I seek.

They've manipulated the search results too much.

I have to go to Bing. BING to get better search results. How embarrassing.

""" This first phase of the trial will assess whether Google has illegally monopolized the online search market. US District Judge Amit Mehta, who is overseeing the trial, is expected to issue a decision next year on whether Google broke the law. If the Justice Department wins, it may seek remedies at the second phase of the trial to break off Alphabet’s search business from other products, like Android and Google Maps, which would mark the biggest forced breakup of a US company since AT&T was dismantled in 1984. """

We'll just have to wait until next year to see what happens.

If the DOJ's case is that Google pays $10B to Apple to exclude competitors then they're suing the wrong company. Their story is actually that Apple is the one with the monopoly that they then sell piecemeal to third parties. Therefore (if that is illegal) it is Apple's behavior they have to change.

Where does it say its all going to apple?

You've made a baseless assumption and inferred an argument from that.

> You've made a baseless assumption and inferred an argument from that.

I think there’s a name for such thing. It’s not Strawman, but something in the same vein.

Conspiracy theory on this:

Knowing they are heading up to this big anti-trust case, they devise the following plan. They will ensure that at least in the search-engine space they are not monopolizing, by making google worse and worse until the point that no one uses it anymore. All in time for their case. Legal defense by enshitification. By the time it happens google won't be the most-used search engine.

Honestly it's not the worst idea if I was a google bigwig.

</joke> (?)

Honestly even though ChatGPT is dumb/on-drugs at times, it's really helped find information especially when asked to mention sources, and when prompted well (you have to know your requirements and be explicit). That is until the learning cutoff of course.

But yeah - it's really hit or miss too, but between it, yandex, and all the cool niche ones I've mostly picked up from HN, like Kagi, Marginalia, etc, or weirdly enough, Bing, it seems like in the last few years it has changed from google being functionally "the way" to find info, to being a plan 'b', or 'c' .. or 'z'.

Of course I'm not denying the scope of their activities in the world, or why the would be on trial for this, just noting that for me personally it's the first time it seems like there's `less` of a functional monopoly (for me and my use).

Search traffic is too sticky and Google has entrenched itself too much for quality to matter, which is the whole point of what the DOJ is arguing. No amount of enshittification will remove Google as the default iPhone browser.

I think this is the issue that Google will face. There may be better search engines out there but they are subscription or request monetized. Would I love to use one of them? Yes. Am I going to? No. I have too many subscriptions than I like as is. I know of them and won't use them. The average consumer has no idea they exist.

https://archive.ph/daYRs

[dupe]

More earlier discussion over here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37480271

My mistake, I had only seen / searched for the Bloomberg reporting.

https://archive.li/daYRs

Reply on news.ycombinator.com