• Troy
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I think the advertising needs to be stripped from the company and that element broken into at least three competitors in the ad serving space. Google can make money on their cloud services and whatever else they’re working on.

    But the conflict of interest is: they are incentivized to serve search results that drive ad revenue back to themselves. That, in combo with their near monopoly position, makes them bad for society.

    To get decent Google results now, I have to use the advanced search and set the timeframe to pre-2020. And then, much to my surprise, it works pretty well. The internet broke during COVID – the combination of everyone being shut in absorbing their social media echo chambers and LLMs and other generative content means you can’t find shit. And Google is specifically enabling and encouraging this.

    • iii@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      To get decent Google results now, I have to use the advanced search and set the timeframe to pre-2020. And then, much to my surprise, it works pretty well. The internet broke during COVID – the combination of everyone being shut in absorbing their social media echo chambers and LLMs and other generative content means you can’t find shit.

      You can’t? Try using another search engines.

      I’m not of the opinion google search is a good product. I understand that the law is being applied.

      My position is that I’m surprised by the rule of the law, as you can apparently both be a monopoly, and have (better) products in the same field, easily available, simply because people don’t care to learn alternatives.

      To me, the above is a people problem, not a technological or business (or even law) problem.

      I understand that, to the law, it isn’t.

      • jackalope@lemmy.mlOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        28 days ago

        My position is that I’m surprised by the rule of the law, as you can apparently both be a monopoly, and have (better) products in the same field, easily available, simply because people don’t care to learn alternatives

        Why does this surprise you?

        • iii@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          28 days ago

          I’m confused how something can be a monopolly, when there’s alternatives easlily available?

          • jackalope@lemmy.mlOPM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            20 days ago

            Monopoly doesn’t refer to literally a single seller. It’s used to refer to disproportionate market power.