Who Does Google Think They're Fooling?

I don't think Google is fooling anyone. They would obviously profit from a more open web. Anything that helps the web as a whole, pretty much helps Google as a whole. This is why if you care about the Internet, Google will be your ally in most cases (yes, not all). That's why they helped with SOPA, too. And they will probably continue to remain an ally in such cases.

So just because Google has something to gain from it (otherwise why would they even do it?) doesn't mean they are wrong on what they are saying about the walled gardens like Facebook and Apple. A more open Internet would help Google, but would also help new start-ups. It would help the next Google as well. Imagine if every website would've been a walled garden in the early 2000's. We wouldn't even have a search engine right now, or at least not a very useful one.

"I don't deny that Sergey probably cares a lot about the web being open" but he's just not allowed to say anything about it ever because his company can then index that open web and make it searchable, then put ads by the search results.

I went into this article expecting some sort of hypocrisy call-out about Google not being open enough while whining about others' walled gardens, but the OP's argument just doesn't make sense to me. Of course they'd make money off of it, that's what they do. That's what all the search engines do. What is OP so angry about?

Isn't this really just an ad homeniem?

Would the author have the same reaction if it was made by Brewster Kahle, founder of the non-profit Internet Archive (www.archive.org)?

After all, the same points can easily be made in regard to non-profit information archiving as for profit-seeking information indexing.

If something is crawlable by Google then it should be crawlable by Bing or DDG or me if I want to try and make something.

Certainly a more 'open web' would help Google, but it would also help Bing, DDG or any other dev who would like to make something interesting.

I'd rather have crawable content searchable thru Google with relevant ads on the side than the shitty advertising Facebook or YouTube throws in my face, for instance. People complain (me too) but the fact is Google (search engine, not company) is the only one in position to deliver relevant advertising that doesn't bother the user. It's a win-win.

The problem here is that you are posing this as an either-or question. It's certainly possible that Apple and Facebook are destroying the internet as we know it AND Google has their own agenda. You don't have to pick one or the other.

Well. I don't know the details. But wouldn't facebook benefit from having social results in google a-la google+? ... If this data was crawlable / more open, wouldn't google be able to include facebook results to personalize search?

So you believe providing ad content isn't to the benefit of consumers?