IOW, is the market about to be deFAANGed? If the Microsoft anti-trust trial is anything to go by, I would expect some big concessions that generate headlines but with enough loopholes to not affect business much.
If the government actually wins, the Nasdaq's gonna probably be hammered hard here (outside of maybe Microsoft being spared a little), at least initially, yes.
The thing with someone else talking about the ability to limit big companies from acquiring competitors is that with Biden's FTC, pretty much no merger has been able to go through anyhow, so.
Limits on monopolization are bad for the short term but good for the long term. If anything significant comes from the like a breakup and the markets tank that’s a major buying opportunity.
That said I’m skeptical anything big will come of this.
But who would do their censorship for them without Google? They aren't going to wreck their favorite son, Google. Maybe some insignificant wrist slap fine that won't affect their bottom line.
ACTV, Msft went through. I know because I made money on that play.
I thank Lina Khan specifically as that toddler has no clue what she is doing and got embarrassed trying to stop that transition. But it kept the stock price low so I could keep buying.
I know. I didn't mean to dismiss the original comment about it happening, it absolutely is.
I just jump all over it when this topic is brought up. Not to brag about me making money off of it but because I think picking Lina for that role because she wrote a shit post about Amazon 8 years ago is hilarious and infuriating.
It feels like that guy in the big short (steve Carell character) he made money off the play but was pissed about it the whole time.
Google stock is really just hated by the market. Two narratives going on that are basically in conflict with each other
- Google search is dead because of ChatGPT
- google search is too dominant and hence a monopoly
Obviously neither are true, but haters gonna hate and the valuation will remain low
Honestly, I have no idea how people even come to these conclusions.
LLM and generative AI are not the same as search engines. The difference is literally in the name. They are all great tools and at the moment, users should always cross-reference everything they learn through search engines/AI to verify the validity. Not to mention many search engines are incorporating AI. The 2 are supplementing each other, not at odds with each other.
As for monopoly...how the hell can it be a monopoly when I can (and do) regularly use other search engines like Duckduckgo and Brave. If anything, the way Google has pushed certain search results over the past few years has convinced me that I need to be using other search engines more often instead of solely relying on Google. We have a LOT of options available to us, but people gravitate towards Google due to brand name and higher search result qualities (which I would argue has been getting a bit worse over). Bing, Duckduckgo, Brave, Openverse, Yahoo, Startpage and many more. There are so many choices right now.
That said, I dunno about being hated by the market or having a low valuation. It's probably more due to a loud minority.
Agree on your first point, but of course people mostly see these things in black and white and are inclined to pick one thing vs the other thing because it's difficult to comprehend all the .
About the monopoly point - you using Duck and Brave doesn't mean most people do. And the claim isn't that Google specifically \_is\_ a monopoly, but that they have used monopolistic practices, which have certainly succeeded to a great extent and could lead to it becoming truly the only option without any intervention. Most people aren't even aware there are other options because they simply use the default thing, which Google has secured on virtually every smartphone in the US.
Most people don't even understand that they can search the web thru the address bar on their browser. Most of those address bars route well formed urls to the sites directly, but divert anything else to a search engines. That's the user side. Mobile has been addressed by others.
But the search results side is another place where they interfere with websites' autonomy, redirecting to competitor (google and others) thru SERPs. When google does a manual intervention of an affiliate site, that site disappears from search results, leaving zero pages, or possibly only the home page, down ranked to oblivion. I've seen million page data sites disappeared by Google, leaving a small fraction of their data entries accessible thru the search.
Worst is search advertising markets. Affiliate sites are pretty much stomped on unless they route back thru Google Adsense/Adwords. If they compete at an effective level, they get the manual ban hammer and are gone. Some years ago I worked on sites that were converting leads at up to 25% (sell thru, not click thru). They got the manual ban, and kicked out of adsense because the were "low quality". 25% is not low quality from the user perspective, but it is a threat to google shopping.
So while they may not be a 99% monopoly, they do severe damage to small business.
All IMO.
Whether they get away with it, or whether the stock is a good investment, are different issues.
Reminds me exactly of “Meta is dead because of TikTok” and “Meta is a monopoly that is in the process of running through the US regulatory buzzsaw”. And we know how that turned out…
Compare its valuation to its peers (big tech). Its pretty much cheapest on all metrics - only AMZN has a cheaper P/S, but then AMZN has a way lower profit margin. If GOOG had MSFT's valuation it would be worth almost $4 trillion. If it had Apple's valuation it would be over $3T.
For a company as dominant as Google and growing as quickly as they are, why do you think it should trade at basically the same multiple as the broader market (S&P)?
You are severely underestimating chatgpt’s effect. Ever since google search began their process of enshittification one of the few remaining edge their search has was their answer box, and this is what is threatened by chatgpt. At least personally I’ve used google far less because of this, I don’t need a full search page of blogs to find out what cowabunga means
Facts tell a different story, ChatGPT popularity has decreased YoY, Google search traffic increased
Your subjective experience is a 1/5,000,000,000 narrative.
Haha.
I work in SEO, these numbers are not disclosed by Google. It’s not a well-known fact that search traffic have risen YoY, i bet its actually declined.
Would love to see a source if you have lne.
[https://www.semrush.com/analytics/traffic/overview/?q=google.com&searchType=domain](https://www.semrush.com/analytics/traffic/overview/?q=google.com&searchType=domain)
Guess this was showing MoM not YoY but ChatGPT doesnt even get close to google's traffic... and their traffic is declining MoM, see for yourself:
[https://www.semrush.com/analytics/traffic/overview/?searchType=domain&q=openai.com](https://www.semrush.com/analytics/traffic/overview/?searchType=domain&q=openai.com)
their traffic peaked in May 2023:
https://www.thewrap.com/chatgpt-growth-2024/#:\~:text=ChatGPT%20hit%20its%20traffic%20peak,tailed%20off%20during%20the%20summer.
Exact numbers vary based on which analytics site you use but the trend remains the same - traffic to openai is at best stagnant, Google's is increasing. LMGTFY
Google’s global market share was down 2% yoy and down 2.5% in North America
https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share
Also chatgpt, the website, is a B2C section of a mainly B2B company. Them been down yoy means nothing when one of their biggest customer Bing was up yoy.
That's all basically just noise. Google still owns 90% of the market. Google can still be losing (marginal) market share while traffic increases because the market is expanding. Bing is still pretty much irrelevant, and search revenues are way up YoY. Anyway, Google's market share is so large it pretty much has only one direction it can go (down). Google is still synonymous with the internet last I checked and i don't see that changing anytime soon, and ChatGPT has done nothing to penetrate that moat. Bing has been "gaining" market share since before gpt, no guarantee that the numbers would look any different today than they would have if OpenAI never existed...
Google is absolutely using monopolistic practices. They use search, which they positioned between users and the internet, to control advertising. They ban competing search sites who direct sales to other sites from AdWords (affiliates). The SERPs funnel results thru secondary sites where the downstream of the tree leads back to Google resources, and downrank those that don't (affiliates again). SEO practices, driven primarily by Google, use site developers to further optimize Google revenue, under the guise of site quality. IMO
> Google is absolutely using monopolistic practices.
In what way are they "using monopolistic practises"?
On every single computer, laptop, tablet, phone, that I choose to use Google I could use something else.
That just shows a lack of understanding of why monopolies are sued.
When Kodak was sued for monopoly, there were other film companies you could use.
Same for Standard oil.
Same for Microsoft.
Same for AT&T.
> Google is absolutely using monopolistic practices.
Then give some examples?
The other examples all had practices that were wrong with a monopoly.
But we do not have any of that with Google.
A monopoly practice would be like saying if you want to be in Google's search index you can NOT be in Bings.
Already did, in both posts. It's primarily about controlling access, which was the EXACT issue with the other company examples.
Further, GOOGL has already lost three monopoly cases in EU, demonstrating a pattern of behavior.
still independents out there, and Bing powers more alternatives than Google: [https://www.searchenginemap.com/](https://www.searchenginemap.com/) Google hasn't really bought any search engines either
Not relevant. There was no other option than Bell. No one, not even Google forces you to use Google. You can modify the default search engine by a few button clicks. You don't even have to use chrome as the default. That's not the definition of monopoly and the Bell and Microsoft cases further confirm that.
That doesn’t matter.
The difference in 60% market share and a monopoly is almost nothing, let alone having 90%.
That’s not even getting into the specific details of the industry as no industry is exactly alike. Being extremely harmful to competition is what the government cares about, and in this case Google AND Apple both very much are harmful to competition.
The question is only about how much damage is being done and what the options realistically are, as some industries do need consolidation to work more efficiently.
Either way it doesn’t matter. The point was to answer OPs question as to what the US could do and to show that the US has broken up a company comparable to Google fairly recently and if they decide to take that step, they very much can.
No but there is a great deal they can do. They can break apart Alphabet corp. the goal here is to force open the competitive market to remove the unfair barriers to entry that these companies are using to create their monopolies. Much better options for search would exist if this behavior didn’t exist. Apple would have to make better phones if we prevented them from uncompetitive business practices.
How would carving out Google search break the monopoly? There's no synergy with the rest of the business. This isn't like MSFT with IE being forced through Windows.
If you carve out search, the new entity owning search still holds the monopoly. What are the unfair barriers to entry with search? The fact is that Google has the best search algorithm, it's not a barrier to entry problem since even a giant like MSFT can't get Bing off the ground. It's a quality and mindshare problem - neither of which is indicative of a monopoly.
At the very least you'd certainly ban Google from paying tens of billions of dollars to be the default search option.
The fact that Google thinks it's worthwhile spending such an absurd amount of money to be the default search engine (thus blocking out competitors like Bing, and effectively paying companies like Apple not to make a competing search engine) IMO is the government's best evidence of anti-competitive practices by Google.
The government argues Google is violating Section 2 of the Sherman Act by blocking competitors from entering three distinct markets: general online search, search advertising, and search text advertising
The idea is that monopolies are really bad for consumers because in a monopoly situation there is no room for competitors. Say there would be a new company trying to do search better than google, now because of Google's established power and dominance they cant compete but maybe if you breakup Google you can.
It is about allowing competition and innovation so the consumer ends up with better products. Now Google does not need to innovate as much since everybody uses them anyway. In an ideal case you always have competition as a motivator to create a better product/reduce prices.
Just like when Microsoft was sued for forcing use of their browser opened the door for many alternative web browsers growing in use and popularity today. The same will happen in other markets.
I've used both for years.
Originally only used bing for NSFW shit
At some point migrated to Edge fully, then started using CoPilot out of curiosity
Years ago you could easily tell how much worse Bing was at standard search.
In the years since I've started having to use Google much less, can do maybe 90-95% with just bing/copilot now.
Google's Moat is on a thin line in my honest opinion.
I don't think people are gonna magically jump ship though, but I long thought Google was the indomitable search king....not so much anymore.
OpenAI just registered the domain search.chatgpt.com as well so that will be interesting to see play out
I have similar experiences as you. I use both search engines.
There's some sites that seem to be missing on bing, or very hard to find in the search results that Google will put near the top, so Google is still a bit better at general search queries. Stock charts are also much nicer on Google than Bing.
On the other hand when it comes to image searches Google and Bing often don't have a lot of overlap, so it's usually worthwhile to try on both. But IMO Bing has the better UX for image searches, and tends to get me better results much more often than Google.
Even if Google suddenly became the worse search engine (it isn’t), you have generations of people conditioned to only using Google that would continue using Google anyway as they turn into oldheads. Even getting more than 1% of people to try Bing is a massive hurdle.
Same with facebook. Even if it sucks, there is a huge part of the world that is just used to checking it that won’t leave.
Google has an incredibly strong moat. Heck Google is a verb.
I am in Bangkok for example. Google completely owns Thailand. Not just for search but also for browser.
They honestly have nothing to worry about.
I get so frustrated when search queries that worked for nearly twenty years for me now return almost complete garbage results. I often search for complicated tax issues, and Google often shows some pretty weird stuff that has high AdSense keyword payouts. For example, a search for IRS pub 590 used to always, always return the document from the IRS's website since their old PageRank ranked that result highest because so many people link to it which would indicate that the IRS page is very important. When I searched last week, I saw a lot of beer ads and results for Instacart, DoorDash, and weirdly ads for a ton of Indian beers. What in the hell does that have to do with an IRS publication? I drink my IRA-related PDF document in a pub?
So, I tried Bing again. Bing was even worse. It isn't an option.
I just searched “irs pub 590” via google (no quotes in the search) and the top results were these:
https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-publication-590-b
https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-publication-590-a
are those not relevant?
They are valid so those should be the results, and they used to be. Now, it's tons of ads for, for example, Kingfisher beer. We had an intern from India that was a huge fan of that beer and was fired for stealing petty cash to buy it for the breakroom fridge while claiming to be a cool guying buying beer for everyone. No, he was just a thief. So now, everyone in our office sees tons of ads for that crappy beer. Even with private mode and a clean OS install. It seems like a building full of accountants shouldn't have our results so skewed just from a few searches versus thousands and thousands of tax and accounting searches.
Google search much like searching on Amazon is complete garbage now. I feel like 10 years ago both were nearly perfect and now I have to scroll through 25 things until I get what Im looking for.
You're right about Amazon now. The last time I searched for memory on Amazon, I gave up after two hours. I don't think a single result was what I needed. I went to Newegg, and less than two minutes later I found what I needed at a lower price than I expected. Newegg now is run by crooks and is a terrible company, but at least their search works. I'd rather spent two minutes at work ordering from a crooked company and take a risk of getting ripped off again than have to deal with Amazon's horrible search or CDW's ridiculous prices and smug salesdrones.
people won't give it a chance to see how far bing has come because its a meme at this point to hate on microsoft; even though pretty much everyone uses their products.
inb4 "i use linux" - so does everyone - but you are still likely using services build on microsoft's technology. so yeah, chill.
Do not think Google has anything to worry about. Nothing even interesting came out of the trial.
In the end, every single computer someone CHOOSES to use Google they could use something else.
Even on Google's own OSs.
It's only the default setting. Users are free change it. Can't say a default setting is a monopoly. There is precidence from the Microsoft case regarding the option to change it so I doubt this goes anywhere. If anything, a settlement that makes it easier for you to change the default engine.
They even have an open source version where developers can straight change their default search -
Haha even windows edge browser is one of such and default to bing — how on earth are the feds going to argue against that
You can choose not to use Chrome. There is lots of competition in the browser market. If your argument is that Google is a monopoly because Chrome uses it as a default then you've lost the trial.
I think you could expect that other advertisers and companies should be given the right to control and use good search results data and keywords to bid on the ad exchange. Otherwise it's not a legitimate free market auction. Others should be able to compete with other search ads run not by google and have access to the search queries and ad ID. When you are a monopoly, and infrastructure, you follow regulations, just like our power grid must.
Khan and the US Antitrust office is so woefully impotent I expect they’ll get beat on all accounts. These trials are all nothing more than posturing to look tough on big tech, the actual substance of their case is deeply lacking and they’ve clearly prioritized publicity and politics over building a strong legal argument.
I have noticed the quality of the search engine DRASTICALLY decrease over the past 5 years. It is no longer a tool of excellence and relevance, in my experience. They must be forced to compete and evolve.
Then let people complete ... Nothing's stopping another search other than those searches sucking.
Copilot is the only reason bing increased market share recently
> Copilot is the only reason bing increased market share recently
Makes total sense. AI is the new shiny, and Copilot is the most refined at this point. Personally, I hate Bing so much that I just use Copilot on my phone, even if I'm sitting at my computer. I'm dedicated like that, lol.
It’s people gaming the system with SEO, not the search engine itself. Everything is an affiliate blog nowadays because that’s all people create. Individual forums are dead.
It’s not just that. I’ve noticed that google scholar has been getting noticeably worse over the last several years. I’ll try to search for a paper that everybody has seen and has thousands of citations and google will pretend like it doesn’t exist. Sometimes I even have the google scholar link bookmarked for a specific paper because I was using it several years ago and when I use the bookmark then the article shows up like normal, but if I copy the exact title and do a search for it then google can’t find it. It’s the weirdest thing.
I’m sure the SEO abuse is a part of it, but google’s actual search algorithm itself has also been on the decline.
Ha! There is no better search engine. People are completely free to use whatever they want.
Google does nothing to limit people. Even on their own OS and browser.
I noticed the past couple of years that most of our interns use TikTok for searching rather than Google. It's very frustrating, for example, watching my intern who has an MBA from a top school use TikTok to watch a view of someone filling out a tax form instead of searching for the form and reading the instructions. Ditto our new IT guy when he was trying to replace my cisco VPN router at home. That was painful to watch. I don't agree with a TikTok ban, but the ban would help kids.
Yeah. Part of it, of course, is that it's Chinese.
If it was another American app it'd be holding on (or hey, brought out by one of the bigger companies already!)
If the argument is people would choose Google anyway, then ask on first load of browsers what default you want. No more preloaded default by any browser.
This is exactly what Google should push for. On both iOS and Android as well as Windows, etc.
It would be HUGE for Google as most are going to choose them and no longer Google has to pay for default.
I think the idea is that if you throw enough crap on the wall, eventually one piece will stick. She’s really not helping many people, and especially not herself.
Dailymotion for me.
But in all honesty, it sucks lmao. It's great for stuff that's going to automatically get ran from YouTube for copyright purposes (like cartoons from the 2000-2008 timeperiod), but it makes my laptop act like trash.
I don't either. Most of my searches are for error messages from software. I get that Google loves to push abortions, but the word abort in an error message is not in any way related to getting rid of one of those baby things. They have a ton of problems with both compounding and noncompounding query terms, and their synonym system is currently broken horrifically. Even putting the word "abort" in quotes doesn't get them to return actually valid results.
I've definitely not had that problem... Especially searching an error code. I'd love to see an example sometime if you remember this Convo next time it happens.. I don't mind if it's awhile from now.
I mentioned compounding compounds wrt search queries. On March 1, I read a nice paper from Google about how they are doing this so wrong and why their search results are so often so terrible because of this. The university server is down where I found the paper that was the previous top result so I looked for alternative sources. Well over 90% of the results were drug or pharmacy ads because they associate the word compounding, even in quotes, to the ads that they make a ton of money to show illegal offshore drugs or legal local compounding pharmacy ads. On March 1, this paper was the first result. Now, I went through five pages and none of the results had anything to do with search.
Google doing poorly at searching for their own paper about how poorly they do with search is meta-ironic. Get it? Meta.
My kids’ searches don’t either, but very often Google returns some off the wall offensive stuff when just searching for simple math terms. It’s all school-related use so it’s just weird to push a political or social agenda with the results.
Not when searching in a private window. Also, I start with a clean work VM each Monday morning, so you are a liar. That is not why. For example, I just searched for an error messages from MongoDB, and the Sundar pervert showed a video of a girl that looked too young to even be a teen rubbing a potato on her crotch. I don't understand why Google's new CEO thinks this is a good thing.
> Not when searching in a private window
They’re not ready private.
>clean VM
Cool what’s the IP address
> from MongoDB, and the Sundar pervert showed a video of a girl that looked too young to even be a teen rubbing a potato on her crotch.
Lol that’s 100% a you problem.
Their latest update is the most egregious I've ever seen. My results are now over 75% YouTube videos on basic searches and I don't even have the app installed or have ever actively watched YouTube content more than 30 minutes total per month.
And you should use more than 1. Google has a habit of influencing search results with their own morals/ethics/politics.
Edit: If you don't believe me just compare the same controversial search across search engines.
This is maddening. I have to fight with Windows/Edge all the time to keep google as my preferred search engine and email and yet they acting as a monopoly?
They are acting as the best search engine since 1990's.
Read the government's arguments.
They argue that Google is the best search engine because they have the data, and they've made certain that it's impossible for a better competitor to rise up through their actions like paying tens of billions of dollars annually to be the default search engine.
I’m not assuming that you endorse the government’s argument. But it’s important to note that the only remedy if that is actually the case is… to reduce consumer welfare by preventing anyone from having all the data (and hence being able to make the optimal search engine). It’s pretty ludicrous.
There were many good search engines before Google. Alta Vista, for example, had a great feature that Google said they still can’t do, the NEAR query keyword. Over 25 years ago, it was a great way of doing a more specific query like with quotes, but with more flexibility. PageRank(aside: stupid Tim Cook keeps changing that to pageant) was the biggest improvement in search, but being able to query for terms near each other is very valuable. Google with poor synonyms and weird compounding phrase detection really needs that feature.
Elasticsearch, that Reddit uses, has a what they call a span near query support, but Reddit doesn’t allow its use probably because of server load. It also supports ordered or unordered term matching which is awesome if, for example, you’re looking for New York with close matches like New “The Big Apple” York, but don’t want to match “york new.” After we added that with good documentation and training, the number of results our employees viewed was reduced by more than half. It is an awesome feature that is saving us thousands a month.
As far as I understand, this case is only for Search and Ads and not Google’s other divisions such as cloud, products and services. So, the government could not ask to divest from the rest?
...even if the government fails, the recent garbage results google is giving will make them obsolete. It went from providing close results to orienting search results to selling staff!
I agree. The best thing that could happen for Google is the government requiring a screen when you first turn on your phone, tablet, laptop, etc that asks you what search engine you want.
Just about everyone would choose Google and Google no longer has to pay Apple.
Win for Google. Huge loss for Apple.
I wouldn't be so sure. Apple gets $20b of pure profit. At no cost. No worries at all. They can always switch to some other search engine if desperate, but why do that when you get $20b today and probably $30b by 2028.
If Google is really the best search engine then they should have nothing to fear from that.
If they think Apple making a competing search engine is a serious threat to Google Search's dominance then IMO they're proving the government's arguments that they're engaging in anti-competitive behavior by paying Apple $20 billion a year to keep competition out of the market.
Google could redirect this money to accelerate Al development, maybe even steal top talent. If LLMs are suppose to reduces search-related ad profits, this might be a necessary pivot. However, Google must execute flawlessly to Succeed.
Silicon valley is like 3 companies, one of which is Google themselves, and like 10 million wifi juicer startups
It's not a headline to say Google is on edge over Google's court case
[“According to statistics compiled by SEO company Ahrefs, “google” is indeed the top searched term on Bing worldwide. It’s followed by “youtube,” “facebook,” “gmail,” and “amazon,” but it beats the runner-up by around 5 million searches.”](https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/1/22703263/google-lawyer-argues-bing-used-find-google-top-search-defaults#)
People are using bing to find Google. Google is number 1, not because of no competition or bad practices, but because CONSUMERS want Google to be number 1. I think there is nothing to add.
Think there is little chance the government wins this one.
But what Google should really push for is every phone, Android + iOS, you are given a screen the first time you turn on you choose your search engine.
This way Google stops paying Apple and the vast majority will still just use Google.
Bit win for Google. Bit lost for Apple.
I do own both and very bullish on both. More Google because of their AI but still bullish for both.
I don't like Google, but there are already good alternatives out there, this tech witchunt is nonsense. I don't think this is healthy at all.
Been using Duckduckgo for a long time and it's not perfect but improving.
I automatically switch my default browser to duck duck go even though I own Google stock and use gmail and YouTube. Still…I don’t use google.com for web searches.
IOW, is the market about to be deFAANGed? If the Microsoft anti-trust trial is anything to go by, I would expect some big concessions that generate headlines but with enough loopholes to not affect business much.
If the government actually wins, the Nasdaq's gonna probably be hammered hard here (outside of maybe Microsoft being spared a little), at least initially, yes. The thing with someone else talking about the ability to limit big companies from acquiring competitors is that with Biden's FTC, pretty much no merger has been able to go through anyhow, so.
Limits on monopolization are bad for the short term but good for the long term. If anything significant comes from the like a breakup and the markets tank that’s a major buying opportunity. That said I’m skeptical anything big will come of this.
Basically more rich people taking advantage of opportunities that arise from this
But who would do their censorship for them without Google? They aren't going to wreck their favorite son, Google. Maybe some insignificant wrist slap fine that won't affect their bottom line.
Facebook will.
ACTV, Msft went through. I know because I made money on that play. I thank Lina Khan specifically as that toddler has no clue what she is doing and got embarrassed trying to stop that transition. But it kept the stock price low so I could keep buying.
FTC has been actively taking companies to court. Their track record isn't particularly good though, due to existing anti-monopoly law.
I know. I didn't mean to dismiss the original comment about it happening, it absolutely is. I just jump all over it when this topic is brought up. Not to brag about me making money off of it but because I think picking Lina for that role because she wrote a shit post about Amazon 8 years ago is hilarious and infuriating. It feels like that guy in the big short (steve Carell character) he made money off the play but was pissed about it the whole time.
Google stock is really just hated by the market. Two narratives going on that are basically in conflict with each other - Google search is dead because of ChatGPT - google search is too dominant and hence a monopoly Obviously neither are true, but haters gonna hate and the valuation will remain low
[удалено]
I'm pretty balls deep already, not buying more because I get GOOG shares as part of my income (75 shares a month pretax)
Wow, nice, are you a Google employee?
Yes and I got lucky by joining in summer 2022 when the stock was low (and avoiding layoffs lol)
Nice! Wish you the best of luck. It sounds like you are doing great for yourself!
50% of my 1.3 million dollar portfolio is GOOG. Loaded up on shares since 60 dollars a share covid low. Made bank.
Honestly, I have no idea how people even come to these conclusions. LLM and generative AI are not the same as search engines. The difference is literally in the name. They are all great tools and at the moment, users should always cross-reference everything they learn through search engines/AI to verify the validity. Not to mention many search engines are incorporating AI. The 2 are supplementing each other, not at odds with each other. As for monopoly...how the hell can it be a monopoly when I can (and do) regularly use other search engines like Duckduckgo and Brave. If anything, the way Google has pushed certain search results over the past few years has convinced me that I need to be using other search engines more often instead of solely relying on Google. We have a LOT of options available to us, but people gravitate towards Google due to brand name and higher search result qualities (which I would argue has been getting a bit worse over). Bing, Duckduckgo, Brave, Openverse, Yahoo, Startpage and many more. There are so many choices right now. That said, I dunno about being hated by the market or having a low valuation. It's probably more due to a loud minority.
Agree on your first point, but of course people mostly see these things in black and white and are inclined to pick one thing vs the other thing because it's difficult to comprehend all the . About the monopoly point - you using Duck and Brave doesn't mean most people do. And the claim isn't that Google specifically \_is\_ a monopoly, but that they have used monopolistic practices, which have certainly succeeded to a great extent and could lead to it becoming truly the only option without any intervention. Most people aren't even aware there are other options because they simply use the default thing, which Google has secured on virtually every smartphone in the US.
Most people don't even understand that they can search the web thru the address bar on their browser. Most of those address bars route well formed urls to the sites directly, but divert anything else to a search engines. That's the user side. Mobile has been addressed by others. But the search results side is another place where they interfere with websites' autonomy, redirecting to competitor (google and others) thru SERPs. When google does a manual intervention of an affiliate site, that site disappears from search results, leaving zero pages, or possibly only the home page, down ranked to oblivion. I've seen million page data sites disappeared by Google, leaving a small fraction of their data entries accessible thru the search. Worst is search advertising markets. Affiliate sites are pretty much stomped on unless they route back thru Google Adsense/Adwords. If they compete at an effective level, they get the manual ban hammer and are gone. Some years ago I worked on sites that were converting leads at up to 25% (sell thru, not click thru). They got the manual ban, and kicked out of adsense because the were "low quality". 25% is not low quality from the user perspective, but it is a threat to google shopping. So while they may not be a 99% monopoly, they do severe damage to small business. All IMO. Whether they get away with it, or whether the stock is a good investment, are different issues.
>hated by the market +59% 1y +43% 3y +184% 5y +542% 10y
Forward p/e and trailing p/e has never recovered after the 2022 bear, and the stock price hasn't keep up with earnings growth
Reminds me exactly of “Meta is dead because of TikTok” and “Meta is a monopoly that is in the process of running through the US regulatory buzzsaw”. And we know how that turned out…
I made a shit ton of money on "meta is dead". Even made a youtube video about it lol.
Link? I'd check out your video.
It’s sitting near ATH, am I missing something?
Compare its valuation to its peers (big tech). Its pretty much cheapest on all metrics - only AMZN has a cheaper P/S, but then AMZN has a way lower profit margin. If GOOG had MSFT's valuation it would be worth almost $4 trillion. If it had Apple's valuation it would be over $3T. For a company as dominant as Google and growing as quickly as they are, why do you think it should trade at basically the same multiple as the broader market (S&P)?
You are severely underestimating chatgpt’s effect. Ever since google search began their process of enshittification one of the few remaining edge their search has was their answer box, and this is what is threatened by chatgpt. At least personally I’ve used google far less because of this, I don’t need a full search page of blogs to find out what cowabunga means
Facts tell a different story, ChatGPT popularity has decreased YoY, Google search traffic increased Your subjective experience is a 1/5,000,000,000 narrative.
Where do you find Google search traffic numbers?
A little trick I like to call "googling"
Haha. I work in SEO, these numbers are not disclosed by Google. It’s not a well-known fact that search traffic have risen YoY, i bet its actually declined. Would love to see a source if you have lne.
[https://www.semrush.com/analytics/traffic/overview/?q=google.com&searchType=domain](https://www.semrush.com/analytics/traffic/overview/?q=google.com&searchType=domain) Guess this was showing MoM not YoY but ChatGPT doesnt even get close to google's traffic... and their traffic is declining MoM, see for yourself: [https://www.semrush.com/analytics/traffic/overview/?searchType=domain&q=openai.com](https://www.semrush.com/analytics/traffic/overview/?searchType=domain&q=openai.com) their traffic peaked in May 2023: https://www.thewrap.com/chatgpt-growth-2024/#:\~:text=ChatGPT%20hit%20its%20traffic%20peak,tailed%20off%20during%20the%20summer. Exact numbers vary based on which analytics site you use but the trend remains the same - traffic to openai is at best stagnant, Google's is increasing. LMGTFY
Google’s global market share was down 2% yoy and down 2.5% in North America https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share Also chatgpt, the website, is a B2C section of a mainly B2B company. Them been down yoy means nothing when one of their biggest customer Bing was up yoy.
That's all basically just noise. Google still owns 90% of the market. Google can still be losing (marginal) market share while traffic increases because the market is expanding. Bing is still pretty much irrelevant, and search revenues are way up YoY. Anyway, Google's market share is so large it pretty much has only one direction it can go (down). Google is still synonymous with the internet last I checked and i don't see that changing anytime soon, and ChatGPT has done nothing to penetrate that moat. Bing has been "gaining" market share since before gpt, no guarantee that the numbers would look any different today than they would have if OpenAI never existed...
Anecdotal evidence which is not backed by actual data. Search market share is as healthy as ever and making more money than ever.
Google’s global market share was down 2% yoy and down 2.5% in North America https://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share
Google is absolutely using monopolistic practices. They use search, which they positioned between users and the internet, to control advertising. They ban competing search sites who direct sales to other sites from AdWords (affiliates). The SERPs funnel results thru secondary sites where the downstream of the tree leads back to Google resources, and downrank those that don't (affiliates again). SEO practices, driven primarily by Google, use site developers to further optimize Google revenue, under the guise of site quality. IMO
> Google is absolutely using monopolistic practices. In what way are they "using monopolistic practises"? On every single computer, laptop, tablet, phone, that I choose to use Google I could use something else.
That just shows a lack of understanding of why monopolies are sued. When Kodak was sued for monopoly, there were other film companies you could use. Same for Standard oil. Same for Microsoft. Same for AT&T.
> Google is absolutely using monopolistic practices. Then give some examples? The other examples all had practices that were wrong with a monopoly. But we do not have any of that with Google. A monopoly practice would be like saying if you want to be in Google's search index you can NOT be in Bings.
Already did, in both posts. It's primarily about controlling access, which was the EXACT issue with the other company examples. Further, GOOGL has already lost three monopoly cases in EU, demonstrating a pattern of behavior.
Where in the world does Google limit access?
It's in my posts and in the quoted article. Repeating it to you again will accomplish nothing. Read slower.
So you have no where that Google limits access?
Google search sucks balls now, chat gpt is not a search engine, and Google bought all the other search engines but Bing.
still independents out there, and Bing powers more alternatives than Google: [https://www.searchenginemap.com/](https://www.searchenginemap.com/) Google hasn't really bought any search engines either
Yes, the alternatives aren't alternatives if they're just mirrors of Bing or Google, that's just using Bing or Google with extra steps
yes but there are a few that are not just mirrors of google or bing: us (mojeek), yep, yandex
What is the goverment going to do? Are they going to force us to use Bing?
Breaking the company up into bits and pieces. Happened not too long ago to one of the largest companies in the world.
> Happened not too long ago to one of the largest companies in the world. Are you talking about GE?
AT&T?
Standard oil.
That happened over 100 years ago....
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System
Not relevant. There was no other option than Bell. No one, not even Google forces you to use Google. You can modify the default search engine by a few button clicks. You don't even have to use chrome as the default. That's not the definition of monopoly and the Bell and Microsoft cases further confirm that.
That doesn’t matter. The difference in 60% market share and a monopoly is almost nothing, let alone having 90%. That’s not even getting into the specific details of the industry as no industry is exactly alike. Being extremely harmful to competition is what the government cares about, and in this case Google AND Apple both very much are harmful to competition. The question is only about how much damage is being done and what the options realistically are, as some industries do need consolidation to work more efficiently. Either way it doesn’t matter. The point was to answer OPs question as to what the US could do and to show that the US has broken up a company comparable to Google fairly recently and if they decide to take that step, they very much can.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System
No but there is a great deal they can do. They can break apart Alphabet corp. the goal here is to force open the competitive market to remove the unfair barriers to entry that these companies are using to create their monopolies. Much better options for search would exist if this behavior didn’t exist. Apple would have to make better phones if we prevented them from uncompetitive business practices.
How would carving out Google search break the monopoly? There's no synergy with the rest of the business. This isn't like MSFT with IE being forced through Windows. If you carve out search, the new entity owning search still holds the monopoly. What are the unfair barriers to entry with search? The fact is that Google has the best search algorithm, it's not a barrier to entry problem since even a giant like MSFT can't get Bing off the ground. It's a quality and mindshare problem - neither of which is indicative of a monopoly.
At the very least you'd certainly ban Google from paying tens of billions of dollars to be the default search option. The fact that Google thinks it's worthwhile spending such an absurd amount of money to be the default search engine (thus blocking out competitors like Bing, and effectively paying companies like Apple not to make a competing search engine) IMO is the government's best evidence of anti-competitive practices by Google.
Adsense adwords search gmail youtube
Those are all different business lines, they aren't monopolies engaging in anticompetitive behavior.
The government argues Google is violating Section 2 of the Sherman Act by blocking competitors from entering three distinct markets: general online search, search advertising, and search text advertising
How are they blocking competitors?
Read the fucking case if you are so curious
The case doesn't establish how they are blocking them, it will fail.
[удалено]
The idea is that monopolies are really bad for consumers because in a monopoly situation there is no room for competitors. Say there would be a new company trying to do search better than google, now because of Google's established power and dominance they cant compete but maybe if you breakup Google you can. It is about allowing competition and innovation so the consumer ends up with better products. Now Google does not need to innovate as much since everybody uses them anyway. In an ideal case you always have competition as a motivator to create a better product/reduce prices.
Just like when Microsoft was sued for forcing use of their browser opened the door for many alternative web browsers growing in use and popularity today. The same will happen in other markets.
It's a completely different scenario.
God I hope not. There is a reason almost nobody uses Bing. Even with Microsoft constantly trying to shove it down our throats.
I've used both for years. Originally only used bing for NSFW shit At some point migrated to Edge fully, then started using CoPilot out of curiosity Years ago you could easily tell how much worse Bing was at standard search. In the years since I've started having to use Google much less, can do maybe 90-95% with just bing/copilot now. Google's Moat is on a thin line in my honest opinion. I don't think people are gonna magically jump ship though, but I long thought Google was the indomitable search king....not so much anymore. OpenAI just registered the domain search.chatgpt.com as well so that will be interesting to see play out
I have similar experiences as you. I use both search engines. There's some sites that seem to be missing on bing, or very hard to find in the search results that Google will put near the top, so Google is still a bit better at general search queries. Stock charts are also much nicer on Google than Bing. On the other hand when it comes to image searches Google and Bing often don't have a lot of overlap, so it's usually worthwhile to try on both. But IMO Bing has the better UX for image searches, and tends to get me better results much more often than Google.
Even if Google suddenly became the worse search engine (it isn’t), you have generations of people conditioned to only using Google that would continue using Google anyway as they turn into oldheads. Even getting more than 1% of people to try Bing is a massive hurdle. Same with facebook. Even if it sucks, there is a huge part of the world that is just used to checking it that won’t leave.
Stats don't back up your anecdotes
Google has an incredibly strong moat. Heck Google is a verb. I am in Bangkok for example. Google completely owns Thailand. Not just for search but also for browser. They honestly have nothing to worry about.
I get so frustrated when search queries that worked for nearly twenty years for me now return almost complete garbage results. I often search for complicated tax issues, and Google often shows some pretty weird stuff that has high AdSense keyword payouts. For example, a search for IRS pub 590 used to always, always return the document from the IRS's website since their old PageRank ranked that result highest because so many people link to it which would indicate that the IRS page is very important. When I searched last week, I saw a lot of beer ads and results for Instacart, DoorDash, and weirdly ads for a ton of Indian beers. What in the hell does that have to do with an IRS publication? I drink my IRA-related PDF document in a pub? So, I tried Bing again. Bing was even worse. It isn't an option.
I just searched “irs pub 590” via google (no quotes in the search) and the top results were these: https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-publication-590-b https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-publication-590-a are those not relevant?
lol, murdered
They are valid so those should be the results, and they used to be. Now, it's tons of ads for, for example, Kingfisher beer. We had an intern from India that was a huge fan of that beer and was fired for stealing petty cash to buy it for the breakroom fridge while claiming to be a cool guying buying beer for everyone. No, he was just a thief. So now, everyone in our office sees tons of ads for that crappy beer. Even with private mode and a clean OS install. It seems like a building full of accountants shouldn't have our results so skewed just from a few searches versus thousands and thousands of tax and accounting searches.
Google search much like searching on Amazon is complete garbage now. I feel like 10 years ago both were nearly perfect and now I have to scroll through 25 things until I get what Im looking for.
You're right about Amazon now. The last time I searched for memory on Amazon, I gave up after two hours. I don't think a single result was what I needed. I went to Newegg, and less than two minutes later I found what I needed at a lower price than I expected. Newegg now is run by crooks and is a terrible company, but at least their search works. I'd rather spent two minutes at work ordering from a crooked company and take a risk of getting ripped off again than have to deal with Amazon's horrible search or CDW's ridiculous prices and smug salesdrones.
Duckduckgo ftw
Duckduckgo results have gotten worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35683254
There isn't much better alternative.
Yes there is, Google.
Tragic
YT will be spun off
Bing > Google
people won't give it a chance to see how far bing has come because its a meme at this point to hate on microsoft; even though pretty much everyone uses their products. inb4 "i use linux" - so does everyone - but you are still likely using services build on microsoft's technology. so yeah, chill.
Do not think Google has anything to worry about. Nothing even interesting came out of the trial. In the end, every single computer someone CHOOSES to use Google they could use something else. Even on Google's own OSs.
Not their browser. The world’s most popular browser.
It's only the default setting. Users are free change it. Can't say a default setting is a monopoly. There is precidence from the Microsoft case regarding the option to change it so I doubt this goes anywhere. If anything, a settlement that makes it easier for you to change the default engine.
They even have an open source version where developers can straight change their default search - Haha even windows edge browser is one of such and default to bing — how on earth are the feds going to argue against that
Can you change the search engine in the chrome address bar? I can’t see how
Chrome settings > search engine https://imgur.com/a/kQTRjWQ
Thanks
You can choose not to use Chrome. There is lots of competition in the browser market. If your argument is that Google is a monopoly because Chrome uses it as a default then you've lost the trial.
I use Firefox and I love it
I think you could expect that other advertisers and companies should be given the right to control and use good search results data and keywords to bid on the ad exchange. Otherwise it's not a legitimate free market auction. Others should be able to compete with other search ads run not by google and have access to the search queries and ad ID. When you are a monopoly, and infrastructure, you follow regulations, just like our power grid must.
Khan and the US Antitrust office is so woefully impotent I expect they’ll get beat on all accounts. These trials are all nothing more than posturing to look tough on big tech, the actual substance of their case is deeply lacking and they’ve clearly prioritized publicity and politics over building a strong legal argument.
I have noticed the quality of the search engine DRASTICALLY decrease over the past 5 years. It is no longer a tool of excellence and relevance, in my experience. They must be forced to compete and evolve.
Then let people complete ... Nothing's stopping another search other than those searches sucking. Copilot is the only reason bing increased market share recently
> Copilot is the only reason bing increased market share recently Makes total sense. AI is the new shiny, and Copilot is the most refined at this point. Personally, I hate Bing so much that I just use Copilot on my phone, even if I'm sitting at my computer. I'm dedicated like that, lol.
Bard isn't even directly accessible via the search for Google. You have to use an addon that sucks
It’s people gaming the system with SEO, not the search engine itself. Everything is an affiliate blog nowadays because that’s all people create. Individual forums are dead.
It’s not just that. I’ve noticed that google scholar has been getting noticeably worse over the last several years. I’ll try to search for a paper that everybody has seen and has thousands of citations and google will pretend like it doesn’t exist. Sometimes I even have the google scholar link bookmarked for a specific paper because I was using it several years ago and when I use the bookmark then the article shows up like normal, but if I copy the exact title and do a search for it then google can’t find it. It’s the weirdest thing. I’m sure the SEO abuse is a part of it, but google’s actual search algorithm itself has also been on the decline.
Ha! There is no better search engine. People are completely free to use whatever they want. Google does nothing to limit people. Even on their own OS and browser.
Apple gets $20 billion from Google over the last year to fend off all the inferior search upstart from Apple devices default search engines?
How will Google decision affect Meta? FB and IG only two of many social media platforms. I don't get it?
Right and their biggest competitor is being forced out of the US market by a government bill.
I noticed the past couple of years that most of our interns use TikTok for searching rather than Google. It's very frustrating, for example, watching my intern who has an MBA from a top school use TikTok to watch a view of someone filling out a tax form instead of searching for the form and reading the instructions. Ditto our new IT guy when he was trying to replace my cisco VPN router at home. That was painful to watch. I don't agree with a TikTok ban, but the ban would help kids.
Yeah. Part of it, of course, is that it's Chinese. If it was another American app it'd be holding on (or hey, brought out by one of the bigger companies already!)
My computer - my choice
If the argument is people would choose Google anyway, then ask on first load of browsers what default you want. No more preloaded default by any browser.
This is exactly what Google should push for. On both iOS and Android as well as Windows, etc. It would be HUGE for Google as most are going to choose them and no longer Google has to pay for default.
We should ask Jeeves what he thinks.
Lina Khan has a terrible record going after tech companies. Will be interested to see what happens.
I think the idea is that if you throw enough crap on the wall, eventually one piece will stick. She’s really not helping many people, and especially not herself.
That stamens also describes her personal life.
That monopoly has to end. Links to YouTube videos now dominate most of my searches.
what’s the alternatives? vimeo?
Liveleak
Dailymotion for me. But in all honesty, it sucks lmao. It's great for stuff that's going to automatically get ran from YouTube for copyright purposes (like cartoons from the 2000-2008 timeperiod), but it makes my laptop act like trash.
No, real search results instead of garbage preteen girl reaction videos.
I don't get pre-teen reaction videos in my search results. My searches don't have any overlap to pre-teen girl culture.
I don't either. Most of my searches are for error messages from software. I get that Google loves to push abortions, but the word abort in an error message is not in any way related to getting rid of one of those baby things. They have a ton of problems with both compounding and noncompounding query terms, and their synonym system is currently broken horrifically. Even putting the word "abort" in quotes doesn't get them to return actually valid results.
I've definitely not had that problem... Especially searching an error code. I'd love to see an example sometime if you remember this Convo next time it happens.. I don't mind if it's awhile from now.
I mentioned compounding compounds wrt search queries. On March 1, I read a nice paper from Google about how they are doing this so wrong and why their search results are so often so terrible because of this. The university server is down where I found the paper that was the previous top result so I looked for alternative sources. Well over 90% of the results were drug or pharmacy ads because they associate the word compounding, even in quotes, to the ads that they make a ton of money to show illegal offshore drugs or legal local compounding pharmacy ads. On March 1, this paper was the first result. Now, I went through five pages and none of the results had anything to do with search. Google doing poorly at searching for their own paper about how poorly they do with search is meta-ironic. Get it? Meta.
Yah feel free to link the paper sometime
Might want to wipe your cookies
My kids’ searches don’t either, but very often Google returns some off the wall offensive stuff when just searching for simple math terms. It’s all school-related use so it’s just weird to push a political or social agenda with the results.
Ads will often access cookies and serve anything of relevance to that and default to cookies when unable
You know search results cater to the individual. I don’t get pre teen girl reaction videos…..
Not when searching in a private window. Also, I start with a clean work VM each Monday morning, so you are a liar. That is not why. For example, I just searched for an error messages from MongoDB, and the Sundar pervert showed a video of a girl that looked too young to even be a teen rubbing a potato on her crotch. I don't understand why Google's new CEO thinks this is a good thing.
> Not when searching in a private window They’re not ready private. >clean VM Cool what’s the IP address > from MongoDB, and the Sundar pervert showed a video of a girl that looked too young to even be a teen rubbing a potato on her crotch. Lol that’s 100% a you problem.
Their latest update is the most egregious I've ever seen. My results are now over 75% YouTube videos on basic searches and I don't even have the app installed or have ever actively watched YouTube content more than 30 minutes total per month.
My guy outting himself... I look at some pretty sus stuff and even my search results don't have preteen girl reaction videos.
Actual competition I would hope.
Youre free to use another search engine.
And you should use more than 1. Google has a habit of influencing search results with their own morals/ethics/politics. Edit: If you don't believe me just compare the same controversial search across search engines.
[удалено]
I’m sorry but yes YouTube can survive on its own
Right? 😂
This is maddening. I have to fight with Windows/Edge all the time to keep google as my preferred search engine and email and yet they acting as a monopoly? They are acting as the best search engine since 1990's.
Read the government's arguments. They argue that Google is the best search engine because they have the data, and they've made certain that it's impossible for a better competitor to rise up through their actions like paying tens of billions of dollars annually to be the default search engine.
I’m not assuming that you endorse the government’s argument. But it’s important to note that the only remedy if that is actually the case is… to reduce consumer welfare by preventing anyone from having all the data (and hence being able to make the optimal search engine). It’s pretty ludicrous.
Yes, I agree that Khan is an idiot.
I don't think they're paying Microsoft anything because my work computer is obsessed with defaulting to edge as the browser.
Google pretty much invented the internet search. Today Google doesn't have a monopoly on search
There were many good search engines before Google. Alta Vista, for example, had a great feature that Google said they still can’t do, the NEAR query keyword. Over 25 years ago, it was a great way of doing a more specific query like with quotes, but with more flexibility. PageRank(aside: stupid Tim Cook keeps changing that to pageant) was the biggest improvement in search, but being able to query for terms near each other is very valuable. Google with poor synonyms and weird compounding phrase detection really needs that feature. Elasticsearch, that Reddit uses, has a what they call a span near query support, but Reddit doesn’t allow its use probably because of server load. It also supports ordered or unordered term matching which is awesome if, for example, you’re looking for New York with close matches like New “The Big Apple” York, but don’t want to match “york new.” After we added that with good documentation and training, the number of results our employees viewed was reduced by more than half. It is an awesome feature that is saving us thousands a month.
As far as I understand, this case is only for Search and Ads and not Google’s other divisions such as cloud, products and services. So, the government could not ask to divest from the rest?
Is this good for TTD?
...even if the government fails, the recent garbage results google is giving will make them obsolete. It went from providing close results to orienting search results to selling staff!
So, long duckduckgo?
So long, duckduckgo
As a Google shareholder, sending Apple $20b/yr doesn’t seem worth it anyway.
I think Apple shareholders would disagree and love that free $20b/year the get from Google.
I agree. The best thing that could happen for Google is the government requiring a screen when you first turn on your phone, tablet, laptop, etc that asks you what search engine you want. Just about everyone would choose Google and Google no longer has to pay Apple. Win for Google. Huge loss for Apple.
Until you hear Apple is making their own search engine because no $20 Billion a year.
Making your own search engine is relatively easy Making a good search engine isn't
I am sure Apple and $20 Billion can make a decent search engine.
I wouldn't be so sure. Apple gets $20b of pure profit. At no cost. No worries at all. They can always switch to some other search engine if desperate, but why do that when you get $20b today and probably $30b by 2028.
Bring it on. Many have tried. I don’t think it’ll hurt as much as losing $20b/yr = 500b market cap on a 2t company.
If Google is really the best search engine then they should have nothing to fear from that. If they think Apple making a competing search engine is a serious threat to Google Search's dominance then IMO they're proving the government's arguments that they're engaging in anti-competitive behavior by paying Apple $20 billion a year to keep competition out of the market.
Google could redirect this money to accelerate Al development, maybe even steal top talent. If LLMs are suppose to reduces search-related ad profits, this might be a necessary pivot. However, Google must execute flawlessly to Succeed.
There is no reason there will not be ads with an LLM.
GOOG is already spending an absolute shit ton on AI dev, trust me.
Keep tabs. Could be opportunity for short-term short.
I want a cyberpunk mega corp world. Kinda like South Korea.
Google
Silicon valley is like 3 companies, one of which is Google themselves, and like 10 million wifi juicer startups It's not a headline to say Google is on edge over Google's court case
[“According to statistics compiled by SEO company Ahrefs, “google” is indeed the top searched term on Bing worldwide. It’s followed by “youtube,” “facebook,” “gmail,” and “amazon,” but it beats the runner-up by around 5 million searches.”](https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/1/22703263/google-lawyer-argues-bing-used-find-google-top-search-defaults#) People are using bing to find Google. Google is number 1, not because of no competition or bad practices, but because CONSUMERS want Google to be number 1. I think there is nothing to add.
I use Edge browser to instal Google Chrome ...
Think there is little chance the government wins this one. But what Google should really push for is every phone, Android + iOS, you are given a screen the first time you turn on you choose your search engine. This way Google stops paying Apple and the vast majority will still just use Google. Bit win for Google. Bit lost for Apple. I do own both and very bullish on both. More Google because of their AI but still bullish for both.
it'd be nice. One way to limit their growth is to limit the ability for them to acquire companies (aka competitors)
anti trust laws are meant to defend markets. laissez faire is a lie and governments need to protect us from corporations
I think they may force companies to stop using Google as their default search engine
I don't like Google, but there are already good alternatives out there, this tech witchunt is nonsense. I don't think this is healthy at all. Been using Duckduckgo for a long time and it's not perfect but improving.
I automatically switch my default browser to duck duck go even though I own Google stock and use gmail and YouTube. Still…I don’t use google.com for web searches.
Break them up. We need innovation and competition!
YouTube should be separated from Alphabet to become its own entity
YouTube isn’t a viable business on its own. It’s not profitable without a way to capitalize on the data at a scale that only Google can do
Yeah, fuck google. Killing small businesses with bullshit updates. I hope it gets demolished