frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

Using Emacs Org-Mode With Databases: A getting-started guide

https://gitlab.com/ryanprior/emacs-org-data-starter
1•adityaathalye•41s ago•0 comments

Thumbnails helped rats, squirrels, and more take over the world

https://www.popsci.com/environment/squirrel-thumbnails/
1•gmays•2m ago•0 comments

Super-Resolution with Structured Motion

https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.15961
2•mzmzmzm•7m ago•1 comments

Early breakfast could help you live longer

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2025/09/early-breakfast-could-help-you-live-longer/
3•gnabgib•12m ago•0 comments

Ask HN: Technology Teacher Needs Validation from Smarter People

2•hnpolicestate•13m ago•0 comments

Show HN: New Site for My GitHub TUI

https://www.gh-dash.dev/
3•dlvhdr•15m ago•0 comments

Phison Pre-Release Firmware Linked to SSD Failures, Not Microsoft Patch

https://www.guru3d.com/story/phison-prerelease-firmware-linked-to-ssd-failures-not-microsoft-patch/
1•DHowett•16m ago•1 comments

How to make team members hungry

https://www.teamblind.com/post/how-to-make-team-members-hungry-jo6kxtgt
1•lopkeny12ko•17m ago•0 comments

Causal Artificial Intelligence [Free Textbook]

https://causalai-book.net
1•malshe•19m ago•1 comments

Salt Typhoon used domains, going back five years. Did you visit one?

https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/08/salt_typhoon_domains/
2•rntn•19m ago•0 comments

ScreenShaver

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugypKJvFn7M
1•bookofjoe•20m ago•0 comments

LaraUtilX – A Utility Package for Laravel

https://github.com/omarchouman/lara-util-x
1•omarchoumann•21m ago•1 comments

Microsoft bets big on nuclear future for data centers

https://www.techradar.com/pro/microsoft-joins-world-nuclear-association-as-it-doubles-down-on-sma...
3•mikece•23m ago•0 comments

Ask HN: Could AI agents benefit from persistent, shared memory?

1•kagvi13•23m ago•0 comments

The Cause of Alzheimer's Could Be Coming from Within Your Mouth

https://www.sciencealert.com/the-cause-of-alzheimers-could-be-coming-from-within-your-mouth
1•amichail•24m ago•1 comments

An Animal's History of Humanity: A Brief History on the Exploitation of Animals

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FQ39PJYW
1•chrisjeffries24•27m ago•1 comments

Blue-throated macaws learn by imitating others

https://www.mpg.de/25325205/0905-orni-blue-throated-macaws-learn-by-imitating-others-154562-x
2•gmays•27m ago•0 comments

Salesloft GitHub Account Compromised Months Before Salesforce Attack

https://www.securityweek.com/salesloft-github-account-compromised-months-before-salesforce-attack/
2•Bender•28m ago•0 comments

Nova Launcher's founder and sole developer has left

https://www.theverge.com/news/773937/nova-launcher-founder-left-kevin-barry-branch-open-source-an...
3•corvad•28m ago•0 comments

Bug in SAP's S/4 HANA exploited in the wild, rated critical CVSS 9.9

https://www.scworld.com/news/bug-in-saps-s4-hana-exploited-in-the-wild-rated-critical-cvss-99
1•Bender•28m ago•0 comments

Qantas trims CEO's bonus following July cybersecurity incident

https://www.scworld.com/news/qantas-trims-ceos-bonus-following-july-cybersecurity-incident
3•Bender•28m ago•1 comments

Teen coder made first millennial Catholic saint at youthful Vatican event

https://www.reuters.com/world/teen-coder-made-first-millennial-catholic-saint-youthful-vatican-ev...
2•rbanffy•29m ago•0 comments

Faith in God-like large language models is waning

https://www.economist.com/business/2025/09/08/faith-in-god-like-large-language-models-is-waning
5•toomuchtodo•33m ago•3 comments

Michigan Marvel: John King Books has a 'secret,' owner says

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/media/marvels/2025/09/06/michigan-marvel-john-king-books-has-a-...
1•rmason•33m ago•1 comments

Laude Institute – Ship Your Research

https://www.laude.org
1•cjbarber•34m ago•0 comments

iPhone app alerts users to nearby ICE sightings

https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/30/tech/iceblock-app-trump-immigration-crackdown
6•rmason•36m ago•2 comments

Kradle: Eval AI with Simulations

https://twitter.com/kradleai/status/1965126412047945966
6•ivolo•37m ago•1 comments

Custom Git ignores with a global gitignore file or Git exclude

https://hamatti.org/posts/custom-git-ignores-with-a-global-gitignore-or-git-exclude/
1•speckx•39m ago•0 comments

The Markov Condition

https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2016/entries/causation-probabilistic/supplement5.html
2•mathattack•39m ago•0 comments

Humans inhale as much as 68,000 microplastic particles daily, study finds

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/aug/28/microplastics-in-hair-study
2•PaulHoule•39m ago•0 comments
Open in hackernews

Google gets away almost scot-free in US search antitrust case

https://www.computerworld.com/article/4052428/google-gets-away-almost-scot-free-in-us-search-antitrust-case.html
159•CrankyBear•4h ago

Comments

SilverElfin•3h ago
Pretty disappointing and sad. The reign of unrestrained megacorps continues.
freediver•3h ago
Only if people keep using them. But user agency is still a thing - and there are alternatives ;)
carlhjerpe•3h ago
That's the problem with megacorps, people can't just switch. Technical people could, can and do. "Normal users" will use what the broligarchy wants them to use.
JustExAWS•2h ago
And how hard is it to switch from Google?
carlhjerpe•2h ago
If you're an Apple user, hard. If you're an Android user, borderline impossible.
raw_anon_1111•2h ago
As an Apple user - which I am - name one service that Google has that I can’t switch away from?

If you buy a device whose operating system is developed and marketed by Google, why would you have any expectation to be able to switch from Google?

And Android doesn’t even have 50% market share in the US so it’s definitely not a monopoly.

carlhjerpe•2h ago
YouTube, adsense, search, gmail.

Not impossible, but very hard for many.

raw_anon_1111•2h ago
I don’t need YouTube, I have 1Blocker to block ads, I use ChatGPT for search and there are plenty of other mail providers - including Apple’s own.
carlhjerpe•1h ago
What do you work with? The initial comment was never about what someone in the industry can and can't do, most people browse the web without an adblocker.
raw_anon_1111•1h ago
Almost a third of users use Adblockers.

https://backlinko.com/ad-blockers-users

I’m almost sure that a third of the world’s population is not “in the industry”

carlhjerpe•1h ago
How do you block ads on an iPhone?

My argument was that for the average user it's hard to not deal with Google, you're yet to provide a single actual argument that I'm wrong.

raw_anon_1111•1h ago
In Safari? Use one of the many content blockers available for iOS. They have been available for a decade.

You haven’t provided a single argument where an iPhone user needs Google for anything.

Your argument about only people “in the industry” using Adblockers was wrong.

carlhjerpe•1h ago
They might not need Google, but they can't get away from them anyways. Google has entrenched themselves everywhere.

You're arguing against your own interpretation of what I'm saying. People use the defaults, people use YouTube, people use Google, people use Gmail, people use Google Maps.

30% use adblockers which are manifestv2 style, they won't block anything companies want you to see. You can't block ads in apps.

raw_anon_1111•1h ago
If you buy an iPhone in 2025 , by default you are not going to have the YouTube App, you’re not going to be setting up a Gmail account by default and you aren’t going to be using Google maps. You will be using Google search unless you go into settings.

Tell me exactly what website ads are not being blocked by my 1Blocker extension? BTW, Safari for iOS has supported more permissive browser extensions for a few years now.

Also, what does ads in apps have to do with Google? 90% of apps that are downloaded and revenue generating directly via in app purchases and I assume ads are games (came out in the Epic v Apple trial). Google isn’t even a player in that category of ads for the most part. They definitely aren’t the dominant player.

carlhjerpe•1h ago
Just because in 2025 the defaults don't have YouTube or Gmail doesn't mean they've not already entrenched themselves.

I can't tell you EXACTLY which sites aren't blocked by your domain based adblocker, I'm not an adblock developer.

If you believe Google doesn't deserve antitrust measures for their duopoly with Apple you're free to do so, you're still arguing against things you interpret freely to make your points.

raw_anon_1111•47m ago
YouTube hasn’t been an included app on iPhone since 2010 and Google Maps hasn’t been included since 2012. Even then, the Google Maps app wasn’t included. Even from the first version of iOS, the Google app wasn’t included. It was the Apple Maps app using Google for the back end. When Apple started using their own data, they still kept your search history and favorites from the earlier version.

> I can't tell you EXACTLY which sites aren't blocked by your domain based adblocker, I'm not an adblock developer.

So in other words you just threw something out there without any evidence…

> If you believe Google doesn't deserve antitrust measures for their duopoly with Apple you're free to do so, you're still arguing against things you interpret freely to make your points.

The case was never about mobile and Google doesn’t have even 50% of the market in the US in mobile. Unless you have some evidence that Apple and Google illegally colluded in the mobile market, there is no law against being part of a “duopoly”.

And you still haven’t said why an iPhone user needs Google or default of having YouTube and using Google Maos data over a decade ago is relevant in 2025.

carlhjerpe•43m ago
You're impossible to have a discussion with, you keep neglecting that Google is everywhere and going for lawyer like interpretations when it suits you.

You won this time!

raw_anon_1111•32m ago
You won’t give specifics. Google may be everywhere in your bubble just like water is everywhere to a fish. I’m asking you to explain to me as an iPhone user - along with 60% of the mobile users in the US - why I need Google, and where is it even a default besides search?
tremon•2h ago
Pray tell, what options for avoiding an unconstrained megacorp do I have when buying a smartphone?
bitpush•1h ago
I mean, building a smart phone is freaking hard. I cant say, 'gosh, I want to fly in a plane that is not made by the megacorps of Boeing & Airbus'

I'd like to fly in a Logitech made airplane.

Yeah, no. Some things are hard, and only some companies (at a certain scale) can do it.

tremon•1h ago
Even aerospace has more competition than smartphones: Embraer, Bombardier, Sukhoi, Antonov, Comac, and HAL -- to name just a few alternatives in passenger aviation. And there used to be a lot more manufacturers in Europe and the US as well, before the biggest capital went on a buying spree.

But you seem to be agreeing with me. I was responding to this comment:

> user agency is still a thing - and there are alternatives

Would you say that was an accurate and realistic comment?

dbbk•1h ago
Is this a serious question? Android has no end of generic OEMs you can pick from, that have no Google software.
tremon•1h ago
You do realize that Android is Google software, right? But if you can name a few vendors that are actually shipping AOSP instead of Google's proprietary tree, I'll be sure to evaluate them.

Of all these generic OEMs you're thinking of, how many do not integrate with Google's Play Store? The only one I know of is Huawei, but that's just another unconstrained megacorp to avoid.

ktosobcy•3h ago
And at the same time behive mind here absurdly complain where others countries/unions want to reign the BigTech monopoly.

I kinda wish the EU would kick out google/facebok/x. It would hurt in the short term but would be way better in the long term…

And as the things look - US administration is incapable ot curbing their cancerish monopolies…

EasyMark•2h ago
In most of these convos I usually see both sides with it being more heavily weighted to being corpo-friendly, but certainly individuals who are tired of monopolies and manipulations by oligopolies. So that's hardly a "beehive mind"
CursedSilicon•3h ago
The spray painted king sure did kick up a big fuss and then immediately let them go without a second thought

As they say, "TACO" (Trump Always Chickens Out)

dzonga•3h ago
now people suddenly realize why "economics" was referred to as "political economy" when people started studying these things.

unfair maybe on consumers (google customers ie those who pay google, not those who use google products) but a very good and pragmatic decision by the U.S gvt.

let your homegrown champions stay strong and keep getting stronger.

because the alternative if Google got broken up, a foreign competitor would replace google not a homegrown one.

markets don't work the way libertarians think.

pyrale•3h ago
> let your homegrown champions stay strong and keep getting stronger.

...Until they start getting banned abroad because your government openly tries to manipulate election in ally countries. And once that happens, you're perpetually weaker and your reputation is done for a century.

People arguing for this kind of hard power are just too weak-minded to understand the extent and strength of US' historical soft power.

> markets don't work the way libertarians think.

Well, if you keep pushing down that line, markets won't work at all, and welcome back to 19th century's gunboat policy, except people have nukes now.

siwakotisaurav•3h ago
Antitrust in US seems more and more of a joke for every new one.

First few literally broke apart big companies, then we have Microsoft with “just don’t make IE default browser” and now basically nothing for google, forget selling off chrome now, not even banned from making search deals, just “maybe in a few years perhaps reconsider the search deals? Totally non binding tho”

thfuran•1h ago
Google should be forced to spin off advertising.
bitpush•1h ago
This is the kind of knee-jerk reaction that causes lawsuits to fail. There's always nuance, and if you're not willing to be detailed, dont be surprised when things dont go your way.
thfuran•1h ago
That's the nuanced compromise. What should really happen is statutorily banning accepting remuneration for displaying or delivering third-party advertisement.
bitpush•1h ago
> What should really happen is statutorily banning accepting remuneration for displaying or delivering third-party advertisement

For Google, or for everyone? Like Apple shouldnt be allowed by get money for Ads on AppStore?

thfuran•1h ago
Everyone. It wouldn't be legal to make the law only apply to Google in any case.
bitpush•44m ago
I see. So you're saying advertisement as a practice should be abolished in the US? That seems .. not ideal outcome?

If you have a company/product/service, how would you attract customers?

xigoi•28m ago
> If you have a company/product/service, how would you attract customers?

By offering a good product that people will happily recommend to others.

nashashmi•3h ago
I’m still scratching my head how chrome and android divestment will help search business competition.
Coffeewine•2h ago
Presumably other search companies will be on a more even footing with google with regards to what they know about you to sell to advertisers if google doesn't also have your complete search history and a complete history of everything you do on your phone.
danans•2h ago
Instead of the blunt hammer of disinvestment of brands, the government should be putting limits on Big Tech's ability to lock consumers and business into their platforms, whether via exclusive search deals, preventing alternative app stores, or hardware-tied communication networks. Those practices are ultimately what harms consumer choice. This decision only seems to address the first of those.

It seems that Big Tech's ingratiation of itself to the current administration using money and lent "credibility" is yielding their desired slaps on the wrists when a spanking was justified by the harm they have done to consumers.

EasyMark•2h ago
Chrome is the most popular browser, if you disconnect that then you cut off google's guaranteed control of the default search engine. That's just a hunch though. Same with Android which is the most popular mobile OS in the world.
bitpush•1h ago
Lots of people use Google through non-Chrome browsers. For instance, on iOS the dominant browser is Safari.

What makes you think an independent "chrome" browser wont put Google Search as the default search engine?

blasphemers•1h ago
Microsoft has the most used operating system in the world with a default browser that defaults search to Bing. How is that working out? Being a default doesn't matter when the other options are better and easy to switch to.
sixothree•38m ago
> Microsoft has the most used operating system in the world

Are you sure about that? Think again.

ApolloFortyNine•3h ago
In my opinion, the search 'monopoly' is just not the best poster child for antitrust cases in the US.

Perhaps the US is too lax on antitrust, but if you, literally anyone reading this, can stop using Google search on every device you own in the next 5 minutes, I just can't see that as a monopoly. Perhaps another word and legislation is required.

You can't even argue the network effect like you can with chat apps or social networks. You can literally cut Google search from your life forever before your lunch break is over.

airspresso•3h ago
Cutting Google accounts out of your life, however, is an entirely different undertaking that would take much longer and have a big impact on how you use the web.
bitpush•3h ago
I dont understand. I can browse the internet using a non-Google computer, use a non-Google browser, go to a non-Google website, use a non-Google programming language etc etc.

Nobody, including Google, is stopping you from doing that.

Note, this is different from actual monopoly of railways (I have to use Central Pacific Railroad) or ISP (My city only has Comcast) or electricity (If I want electricity, I have to use PG&E).

The barometer is whether there's meaningful alternative. Can I do X without the $company in question = not a monopoly.

noosphr•3h ago
>Note, this is different from actual monopoly of railways

You can ride a horse. Ergo, not a monopoly.

>ISP (My city only has Comcast)

You've got starlink. Not a monopoly.

JustExAWS•3h ago
Sounds like a local problem. Even my parent’s small town in south GA has a choice between AT&T Fiber with symmetric 1GB up/down and the cable company.

> You can ride a horse. Ergo, not a monopoly.

Are you really saying that there is no other search engine you can use besides Google?

LeifCarrotson•2h ago
No, they're saying their is an alternative, but it comes at a huge disadvantage. Perhaps not for individual users, as a DDG and Firefox user I'm quite content, but it's definitely an overwhelming disparity for website admins. Even if that admin is not literally in Google Analytics to view their site data (and they probably are), they're still looking at an overwhelming majority of organic traffic coming from Google Search using Google Chrome. And for site publishers and advertisers, Google AdSense or Google Ad[Word]s are enormous.

In 1870, if you wanted to get from Chicago to San Francisco, it would be facetious to claim that Union Pacific did not have a monopoly on that route. No, Union Pacific wasn't forcing you to board their train. Just like you can Ctrl+T over to duckduckgo.com/ or bing.com/ or kagi.com/ in seconds, and never go back to Google. You could avoid the railroad monopoly by 'just' riding a horse, or walking, or taking a boat down the Mississippi and launching a sailing expedition around Cape Horn. That's still a monopoly.

raw_anon_1111•1h ago
That’s a horrible argument. The difference between riding a horse and riding a train is multiple orders of magnitude. The difference between using an alternate search engine is minimum and the experience is often better than Google.

And if your entire business strategy is to have a website and depend on Google search results to drive traffic, you are doing it wrong as many news organizations like Buzzfeed found out.

I do occasional self promotion and “thought leadership” bullshit to put my name out there. I go to where the eyeballs are - LinkedIn. It’s far more likely that the people I want to reach are on LinkedIn than my blog that I don’t have a link to anywhere. I just use it as a publicly accessible place to workshop my writing and thoughts before I post them to LinkedIn.

And I will play the world’s smallest fiddle for advertisers even then, if you have a product to sale to consumers, you are probably better off using Amazon or a Meta app to advertised. It’s better targeting and ads are less likely to be blocked.

bix6•3h ago
Around half of all websites use Google analytics so good luck totally avoiding Google.

Just use an ad blocker. O wait all the chromium browsers just made that harder with manifest v3. 75% of browsers are chromium based?

I don’t think it’s fair to compare digital services to something like PGE. Fundamentally different.

Google lost the case. They just weren’t punished how they should’ve been.

Edit: wow and how could I forget 8.8.8.8 or google’s own transmission lines!

bitpush•3h ago
> Around half of all websites use Google analytics so good luck totally avoiding Google.

Isnt adding Google Analytics to the website a decision solely and independently made by the website in question?

bix6•2h ago
You said you you can browse the internet independent of Google and I’m saying you can’t because yes other people can force Google onto you
bitpush•2h ago
Whether a company has a business relationship with a company you dont like, doesnt make the same argument you're making.

It is like saying, I dont like Coca Cola but when I go to McDonald's to eat food, they only serve Coca Cola. Hence, Coca Cola is.. bad? McDonald's is free to chose any business partner they like, and you insisting that McDonald's shouldnt use Coca Cola sounds silly.

endemic•1h ago
If you went to McDonalds and had to drink Coke just to walk in the door.
JustExAWS•2h ago
If I understand correctly, manifest v3 is like what Safari implemented a decade ago and it’s perfectly possible to block Google analytics with Safari content blockers.
bix6•2h ago
Yes you can still block it’s just stripped down now eg ublock lite.

My point is that it’s incredibly difficult to avoid Google. Especially for people who aren’t nerds.

raw_anon_1111•2h ago
How is your argument that you can’t avoid Google supported by the argument that with manifest v3 you can’t block Google analytics even though you can?

In the US, iOS has 60% market share and installing an ad blocker is a matter of going to the App Store and installing it and then enabling in settings. They all walk you through the process. It’s the same on the Mac with the Mac App Store.

bix6•1h ago
That’s not my entire argument I just started going a rabbit hole to show how tied in it all is.

Google pays Apple to be the default search engine.

Google transmits our data undersea.

You can’t easily avoid them!

raw_anon_1111•1h ago
And you can change your search engine. If you have evidence that someone Google has quantum computers that allows it decrypt encrypted traffic, I’m sure people would like to know.

But no one has been proposing that Google not be allowed to have underseas cables

bix6•55m ago
Yeah because metadata isn’t important…

The argument is that you can cut Google out of your life. The reality is you can’t and many don’t even realize how deeply intertwined it is.

fred_is_fred•2h ago
And the other half all put a giant pop-up asking me to sign into Google. I've not yet figured out how to block it, if anyone knows I would love to hear it.
master-lincoln•2h ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/wiki/solutions/#wiki_g...
akagusu•2h ago
I cannot use my bank app without Google Android. This it count like a monopoly?
bongodongobob•2h ago
No, that's an issue with your bank.
bitpush•1h ago
Exactly. "McDonald's only serves Coca Cola. So Coca Cola is .. bad?"

I sometimes dont understand the logic of some people.

dbbk•1h ago
You can change bank
throwawayqqq11•1h ago
> i can ...

You are doing the same mistake PP did, projecting from yourself to others. Not everyone can do this or knows the resons why it is important.

If the search market was that flexible, it wouldnt really make sense to spend a fortune to become the default SE.

scarface_74•3h ago
I could completely cut Google out of my personal life with no ill effect. I can either use Apple’s iWork or Microsoft’s Office 365, I use ChatGPT as my default search engine now because Google has gotten so bad. I don’t use YouTube regularly except once a year to watch AWS Reinvent videos.

I use Safari on my Mac because Chrome is worse on battery life and doesn’t integrate as well with the rest of my digital life. I use Gmail. But at the end of the day, it’s just another one of my emails.

b_e_n_t_o_n•2h ago
I did this and it's been great. Still use Google search because it's by far the best but I was using DDG for a while. It's not that difficult to de-Google.
EricWF•3h ago
What about the special access granted by many websites to the Google scraper?
bitpush•3h ago
Isn't that a decision solely and independently made by the website in question, and not Google?
ohashi•1h ago
Isn't having the power to get everyone to do things that favor your service... a monopoly?
bitpush•44m ago
What power? What happens if company doesnt use GA and use Plausible? Nothing. So many companies do it.
mortoc•3h ago
That's the wrong lens to use. Determine monopolies based on the view of a potential competitor.

Say I'm a new search engine startup that has some better tech than Google has, we invented a better wheel. How hard would it be to compete on merit?

scarface_74•3h ago
That’s not how unfair monopolies are judged in the US. It’s based on harm to consumers.

As far as how hard is it to compete, it’s not the governments job to force people to use your alternate search engine. Choosing another search engine is literally just a click away.

bitpush•2h ago
Exactly. It has never been easy to search stuff using non-Google search engines.

You like traditional search engines? Use bing, ddg.

You like AI powered ones? ChatGPT, Perplexity

You want to pay for your search? Kagi

You want to plant trees each you search (!)? Ecosia

There are soooo many choices. But people choosing Google out of free will seems to be a bad thing for Google.

dietr1ch•3h ago
> literally anyone reading this, can stop using Google search on every device you own in the next 5 minutes

Yeah sure you can avoid typing google.com and think you just ghosted Google forever, but that won't end Google's relationship with you as it runs deeper than you know through its advertisement and tracking platform.

And what about services beyond search at this point?

Youtube, GMail, Google Calendar, GoogleFi, Maps, Play store (movies, apps), Photos, Drive.

I can try stop using those services immediately, but with a huge cost of data and connectivity loss (there's no easy email redirection, accounts are usually tied to emails). You'll also miss out on things that don't have a nice alternative and you are socially pulled into (green/blue messages in iMessage within the US or having WhatsApp abroad), can you stop clicking into links to documents, presentations and videos that people share?

username332211•2h ago
Isn't the lawsuit (and the entire discussion) specifically about a search monopoly?

Also, I'm curious, how many of the things you listed would be normally used by a prolific user of Apple hardware and software? Just YouTube, right?

bitpush•1h ago
> I can try stop using those services immediately, but with a huge cost of data and connectivity loss

Doesnt this mean that you get certain value from Google. Are you upset that one company is creating products that you find indispensible. Or are you upset that others have not been able to build products that you like?

This is like saying "Apple M series chips are sooo good. Apple sucks"

dietr1ch•1h ago
Think about how easy it became to switch mobile carriers. The state of things in the Internet is closer to mobile companies before phone numbers were easily portable across carriers.

Can I stop using GMail? yes, but not really. Same as I wasn't able to switch phone companies 20 years ago because reliance on the phone number to stay connected (and abusive contracts).

> Doesn't this mean that you get certain value from Google.

Yes, but that's no the issue, otherwise I'd have no reason to use it in the first place, right? The problem is that it's hard to migrate.

croes•3h ago
We can, but what about all the people who type facebook into the browser address bar to get to Facebook.com per Google?
heisenbit•2h ago
If you are in the business of selling goods can you afford to walk away from Google? Remember you as consumer are not the customer but the product.
johndhi•2h ago
That would be an antitrust case against Google Ads though, no?

This case was about consumer search.

groggler•1h ago
Can you explain how Google search exists independent of it's trust with Google Ads. What are the other revenue sources?
matthewdgreen•2h ago
If you’re a search engine competitor of Google’s, and Google owns the largest browser and mobile OS and pays the remaining browsers to make them the default, your business is vastly less likely to succeed. This holds even if customers could go out of their way to use your service. That’s what I understood this verdict to have determined. Unfortunately the remedy is bad and pointless, but that’s a separate matter.
dbbk•1h ago
The EU uses the term "Gatekeeper"
LarryDarrell•3h ago
The writing was on the wall when Kamala Harris wouldn't commit to keeping Lina Khan at the FTC. We had some soft Anti-Trust action for the first time in decades, and the Trusts responded. If we get the chance to try again, we should be more clear eyed about what we are up against.

I've de-Googled my life as best I can, but I know how little it actually matters. Now that Google is clearly on the path of closing up Android, I hope the Linux phone effort gets reinvigorated.

thewebguyd•3h ago
Unfortunately I don't think we're going to get the chance to try again. This, and Apple's upcoming case which they'll probably get off free as well, was our chance.

These companies are now even more emboldened, and with market caps bigger than the GDP of most countries, there is no one to stop them. Every politician has a number, and this administration has shown that open bribes are legal and expected.

Good luck prosecuting any big tech when they can pay billions of dollars to the administration to make anything go away.

lotsofpulp•2h ago
It does not make any sense to compare market capitalization to GDP.

GDP is a measurement of flow within a certain timespan, market capitalization is a guess by the market of the total potential at a specific point in time.

daveguy•2h ago
Wait, are you trying to blame this decision on Kamala Harris not pre-committing to keeping an anti-trust advocate in the FTC? I'm not sure if you noticed, but Kamala Harris is not president and never made these decisions about the FTC. I guarantee you her decisions would have been night and day better than the fraud currently inhabiting the whitehouse.

Maybe I'm just misinterpreting your words.

LarryDarrell•35m ago
I'm saying our tenuous attempts towards reestablishing the most basic of anti-trust was dead regardless of who won the election[1].

I think this decision would have been the same regardless of who won. As for the next few years... Harris was clearly signalling that her FTC would be a return to rubber stamping mergers and acting only against the most egregious corporate actions, and even then only when the penalties wouldn't be substantial. I doubt very much that her appointment to FTC Chair would be much different than the current Andrew Ferguson.

Nothing I've written endorses Trump or his actions. But we have to be a little bit more realistic about the interests that Harris was aiming to represent.

We can say that Harris would have been better than Trump in the aggregate, while also prioritizing the interests of Business over those of Consumers. Both these things can be true.

[1]https://jacobin.com/2024/12/harris-khan-antitrust-west-elect...

dizhn•3h ago
I remember back in the day the case against Microsoft looked huge too. I don't remember the details but it "felt like" Bush Jr got elected president and that whole thing went away.
lapcat•3h ago
There's a reason nobody remembers: the DoJ announced it was no longer seeking the breakup of Microsoft on September 6, 2001. A few days later, 9/11 occurred, and all other news was erased.

I'm not suggesting a conspiracy, by the way, just stating the facts.

ChrisArchitect•3h ago
Anything here in this blog/linkspam that hasn't already been said last week?

More discussion:

Google can keep its Chrome browser but will be barred from exclusive contracts

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45108548

The worst possible antitrust outcome

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45120050

rudimentary_phy•2h ago
I think the AI reasoning in the ruling has a little bit of truth to it. I have found myself using search quite a bit less. I'm still not sure what that means in the long run, but it does feel like times are changing.

When I do use Google, I end up using that crappy Gemini blurb at the top a lot more than I would like to admit as well, so they are definitely still prime contenders in the AI space even before looking at the Gemini platform itself. Even with all the things it gets wrong (the model in its search is definitely one of the worst), it is often more useful than not to me, and helps point me in the right direction more quickly.

This could all be just another repeat of the browser wars where Chrome overtook Firefox, but it isn't yet set in stone. Google definitely seems a little bit worried about the future with AI.

xnx•2h ago
Would have much preferred the US spent its time fixing the Comcast/Xfinity monopoly.
OutOfHere•1h ago
Something tells me that Google and Meta get backroom deals by "virtue of" allowing their apps and Android to easily be hacked by governments. In particular, by keeping WhatsApp vulnerable, keeping Google Messages vulnerable, stopping the release of AOSP patches, etc.
catigula•1h ago
Any company that receives special federal protections should also be held partially or entirely in trust-ownership by the US government, not shareholders.