Note: Original report by Bloomberg, article by Reuters proxied by Neuters to bypass paywall.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    35 months ago

    [Google controls how people view the internet]

    This doesn’t quite make sense. How does Chrome “control how people view the internet”? Isn’t html/css the main thing that controls how people view the internet?

    [ and what ads they see in part through its Chrome browser, which typically uses Google search,]

    But it is trivial to change your default search agent right?

    Is this move something we should view as a good thing, and if so, then why?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      23
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Essentially, everything is Chrome, Firefox or Safari.

      Brave, Edge etc are chrome.

      Most people are using chrome.

      Google controlling chrome controls what the vast majority of people use to see the internet, and then they change chrome to make it harder for you to block ads that they want to show.

      There’s no reason for chrome to break ad blockers unless it’s owned by an ad company.

      Edit: Google done some other shady things by owning it in the past as well.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      155 months ago

      Chrome has a massive market share and Google abuses that market share by breaking web standards, and pushing people towards Chrome because “the competition doesn’t work”.

      They act in bad faith and abuse their position to more deeply entrench their position in anticompetitive monopolistic ways.

      That’s the Crux of it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        15 months ago

        Google abuses that market share by breaking web standards,

        Has this actually happened? Are there examples?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      155 months ago

      Breaking up monopolies is a good thing, and Google arguably holds too much power. Chromium is being used in 70% of browsers, and the decision how to implement and develop web standards are all in the hand of one for profit company, which had little interest in keeping things open and accessible (and private).

      A quote from this Register article sums it up nicely:

      What we are forced to assume in turn is that Chrome is built by the professional developers working for an ad agency with the primary goal of building a web browser that serves the needs of other professional developers working for the ad agency’s prospective clients.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        25 months ago

        Chromium is being used in 70% of browsers

        To me, I don’t think that should be an issue in anything. That’s up to browser makers. They are able to use whatever they want, and they will use whatever is easiest/best for their usage. They are also free to use WebKit (Safari’s engine), Gecko (Mozilla), or roll their own. This just sounds like you want to punish someone because they made something everyone preferred just because everyone preferred it.

        It’s different when you are “forced” to use it (use ours or we won’t let you on our devices, like iOS, or use ours and we will lower/cut our fees for other things you want/need, like many different companies). But when the public is truly free to use what they want and they all want the same thing, then it shouldn’t be used as a reason to punish them.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    435 months ago

    If this happens, I’d be interested in seeing how this effects ChromeOS. I don’t use it but my mom does.

    Also, if you’re confused as to why ChromeOS would be effected, while it’s based on Gentoo Linux, ChromeOS uses a modified version of Chrome as it’s Desktop Environment.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      85 months ago

      Yes I would like to know what that means for ChromeOS and Chromebooks. If the new “Chrome” company got ChromeOS also that would be huge. But if that is not a requirement Google could just put another Chromium browser in ChromeOS. They could also continue to sell Chromebooks but based on a ChromiumOS fork.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        75 months ago

        The Lemmy web client, same as Reddit, allows you to de-upvote your posts.
        It feels weird to upvote your own post anyway and I don’t do so unless I am asking for help and want it seen more, urgently.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          145 months ago

          That is so odd, if you dont think what you are saying is relevant or necessary why say it?

          Your conscientiousness will be lost in a sea of others self importance, at least level the playing field and support yourself.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            45 months ago

            if you dont think what you are saying is relevant or necessary why say it?

            If I worried about necessity, I would probably not have a Lemmy account.

            level the playing field

            I’m not playing dependent upon others, just upon my own ideals. I feel like an upvote needs to mean something. In my case, it means, I need more people to see it, for me.
            In most cases, the feeling behind my posts/comments are: If someone sees it, good, have fun.

            • Anas
              link
              fedilink
              English
              85 months ago

              Your own upvote on your own comment doesn’t mean anything, because every single comment starts with one upvote by default, not zero. All you’re doing is moving your comments below everyone else’s.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                05 months ago

                Your own upvote on your own comment doesn’t mean anything

                Neither do words, or little magnetic particles lain down nicely on a polymer disc, until people decide they mean something.

                • Anas
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  55 months ago

                  I don’t think anybody decided that an upvote count of 1 means anything.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    205 months ago

    I‘ve actually when something like this will happen. A few years ago German energy providers and distributors needed to split, because it gives you an unfair advantage if you own both. Whole companies were split in two. People working for years together would no longer work together. In the end consumer were much better off after the split. I feel the same way with internet browser. It is unfair if you own the infrastructure (Chrome, energy grid) and the services that run on it (YouTube, power plants).

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      205 months ago

      The US did this to AT&T. It was broken up into dozens of “baby bells”. Then it gradually bought them all back up and now it’s as big as it ever was

      • DacoTaco
        link
        fedilink
        English
        95 months ago

        Thats stupid of the US to not block the merges again then… :p

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          75 months ago

          Well this process also spawned Verizon, so they do have legitimate competition now and that’s what matters to antitrust actions

          • DacoTaco
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Very true, but in due time verizon could also be bought. Hence fcc should technically block it, like the nvidia and arm merge.
            Or microsoft and activision ( which was heavily contested ).
            Both were heavily contested worldwide

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    225 months ago

    Better hurry, Trump’s rubber stamp DOJ will kill this faster than a cop encountering a dog.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        165 months ago

        It has a soft paywall.

        I think the common practice is to link to the original in the URL bar and then use the body text to do paywall/loginwall removals.

      • Admiral Patrick
        link
        fedilink
        English
        55 months ago

        Then leave that to every one else to deal with; don’t make other people wear your tin-foil hat. Or just start your own community and call it “Dot’s Offbrand Extravaganza” or something.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          45 months ago

          Pretty sure this is more about access and performance than privacy. I never knew about this site before, but damn, a news article that only contains words on a page and loads quickly? I thought news websites were supposed to be hostile to users?

        • snooggums
          link
          fedilink
          English
          15 months ago

          don’t make other people wear your tin-foil hat

          The words, they mean nothing!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1375 months ago

    Lit. It’s a good ask although it’s not clear what separation means here. Not going to hold my breath, the big corpos seem to usually win these kind of games.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      765 months ago

      Chrome is now owned by a company, owned by a company, owned by another company, that is owned by Google.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        735 months ago

        And even in the case where there is actual separation, and competition, it will only be temporary!

        see history of telco consolidation after a monopoly breakup in 1984

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              3
              edit-2
              5 months ago

              Thanks to this thread TIL it was one of the few serious competitors to ATTs monopoly.

              Southern Pacific Communications and introduction of Sprint

              Sprint also traces its roots back to the Southern Pacific Railroad (SPR), which was founded in the 1860s as a subsidiary of the Southern Pacific Company (SPC). The company operated thousands of miles of track as well as telegraph wire that ran along those tracks. In the early 1970s, the company began looking for ways to use its existing communications lines for long-distance calling. This division of the business was named the Southern Pacific Communications Company. By the mid 1970s, SPC was beginning to take business away from AT&T, which held a monopoly at the time. A number of lawsuits between SPC and AT&T took place throughout the 1970s; the majority were decided in favor of increased competition.Prior attempts at offering long-distance voice services had not been approved by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC), although a fax service (called SpeedFAX) was permitted..

              In the mid-1970s, SPC held a contest to select a new name for the company. The winning entry was “SPRINT”, an acronym for “Southern Pacific Railroad Internal Networking Telephony”.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          15 months ago

          If they split Google, MS, Apple, Meta and Amazon all simultaneously, with some condition for the splinters to not merge back, and that contaminating the results of their allowed mergers, there may be good outcomes.

          Or there may not. It’s about people, not laws, after all.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        425 months ago

        It’s like they’re a company pretending to be another company, disguised as another company. Tropic Thunder all the way down.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      95 months ago

      Not needed. Internet Explorer existed for years after the 90s. It wasn’t killed by the courts. It was killed by the fact that it’s only function was to install a better browser on first boot.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        95 months ago

        I think you are severely underestimating how many people don’t even understand the difference between windows, explorer, a web browser and even the Internet itself during the 90’s well into the 2000’s even 2010’s.

        That’s who kept IE alive

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          No offense but it was the US Government. Most of their websites were coded for it, and quite a few of them didn’t work properly or reliably in other browsers as a result. This was true up until it was sunsetted and they were forced to update to Edge and some of the websites still haven’t been properly moved over to Chromium. When the pandemic hit and the Armed Forces had to setup remote work for thousands of people Microsoft basically built them a fork of Teams. The US Government is kind of running hand in hand with Microsoft on a lot of stuff if you just hazard a cursory look.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      45 months ago

      They didn’t make the first one! They got it from Apple, who themselves got it from KDE.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      115 months ago

      What’s to stop them just making another browser?

      Nothing. Chromium is open source. So they could just fork it and declare a new “official” google browser and it would be a lot like Chrome.

      I’m not sure why the govt thinks forcing google to give up a particular fork/branch of an open source browser is all that meaningful. It might make more sense if Chrome was a closed source one of a kind browser.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        105 months ago

        I’ve worked in the aftermath of DoJ agreements like this one. The DoJ is not stupid (or at least didn’t used to be) and will have stipulations about removing Google employees from governance/write permissions to the project, with follow up check-ins every few months to make sure any shenanigans aren’t occurring.

        …none of that matters though now that the DoJ is going to be dissolved.

        • azuth
          link
          fedilink
          English
          25 months ago

          They need to ban them from forking the browser. Google has the ability to get people to install the new Google totally-not-chrome browser. Especially if they keep Android as well.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        35 months ago

        That’s exactly what I was thinking. It also makes Chrome essentially worthless to anyone except Google.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          15 months ago

          Maybe as a whole package, but node.js servers are ubiquitous and have a ton of stakeholders that have nothing to do with web browsers.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  25 months ago

                  The JavaScript (code) engine that powers Chrome is the same JavaScript (code) engine that powers Node servers. Node is used to power a large portion of web applications and internal corporate tools. The Chromium/Node project is under the tight control of Google engineers.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    95 months ago

    It will never happen. But it would be a good thing for the openness of the web. More Firefox, less Chrome.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      45 months ago

      Yep.

      Tech companies have extreme “Fuck You” money. They have learned a lot from the past two decades of Antitrust acts.

      That politician is either going to quickly change their mind with some bribes, or watch their entire life disappear with an army of lawyers or paid off peers shutting them down.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15 months ago

      Wouldn’t it put Firefox on a pickle? Say Chrome gets bought out of Google’s hands, would they still bother to pay half a billion to Firefox to stay as the default search engine? Could Firefox survive being financially independent?

    • 0xb
      link
      fedilink
      English
      20
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      That would be the logical thing according to common sense and probably according to pichai a few weeks ago, but trump just nominated an anti big tech and musk friend to the FCC. musk is behind almost everybody in ai and autonomous cars so he’ll definitely push to hamper all competitors.

      Sure, we don’t know how far would they go or how long will musk keep having white house influence and I personally think breaking up google is now off the table, but I don’t think they will get off the hook too easily.

      So surely a very big bribe.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      975 months ago

      Google is such a good company, one the best. Everybody says it. I was just talking to John Google the other day, and he tells me, no really he did, he tells me we’re going to do amazing things together. Oogles of googles. That’s what we’ll sell. Everybody will know about google by this time next year. It’s true.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        215 months ago

        You forgot the unrelated rant in the middle about toasters being too dark these days or some shit.

        • xor
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          And a series of words that sounds kinda like a complex sentence when you listen to it, but actually means nothing whatsoever

          And he says to me… a very smart guy, Mark, he’s really doing… he’s really got to show… when he does things he really does them, you know, like he really does, very impressive, very modern

        • Echo Dot
          link
          fedilink
          English
          9
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          He also didn’t say his name three times in 10 seconds. Then sort of fade off and vaguely look off into the distance.

          They said to me Donald, Donald, they said Donald, they do amazing things, real bigly things, my father, my father, said to me Donald, they do big things Google land. Really good things… Yeah… Big things…

          • SayCyberOnceMore
            link
            fedilink
            English
            25 months ago

            I love to see professionals in action.

            That’s craft(wo)manship right there.