frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Open Source @Github

fp.

For the first time ever, Google Search is less than 50% of Alphabet's revenue

https://www.kadoa.com/companies/insights/google-search-below-half
185•hubraumhugo•1h ago•115 comments

We're releasing the weights of Mistral Large 4

https://mistral.ai/news/mistral-large-4-oss/
698•kuberwastaken•3h ago•183 comments

H.264 Is Magic (2016)

https://sidbala.com/h-264-is-magic/
125•ea016•2h ago•55 comments

Tomáš Mikolov awarded the Medal of Merit by the President of the Czech Republic

https://www.vut.cz/en/but/news-f19528/two-but-graduates-received-state-honors-from-the-president-...
43•armcat•57m ago•3 comments

Zombie stats: Where the numbers AI quotes come from

https://trakkr.ai/trakkr-research/zombie-stats
82•mektrik•2h ago•43 comments

LLM Voice

https://martinfowler.com/bliki/LLM-Voice.html
79•ibobev•2h ago•37 comments

DoorDash to acquire Instacart

https://about.doordash.com/en-us/news/doordash-to-acquire-instacart
244•WalterSobchak•5h ago•433 comments

Grace Blackwell needs a new scheduler: 27% more usable GPUs from the same racks

https://skypilot.ai/blog/grace-blackwell-needs-a-new-scheduler
53•wondersky•2h ago•5 comments

Toxic Experts

https://nedbatchelder.com/blog/201711/toxic_experts
24•luu•1h ago•15 comments

Chained PHP2Shell Exploit Roots 25 Servers, Including US Government Servers

https://dreamgroup.com/blog/chained-php2shell-exploit-roots-25-servers
176•882542F3884314B•7h ago•81 comments

noalloc: Tooling and libraries to enforce zero heap allocations in Golang

https://github.com/theconsensuslabs/noalloc
29•g0xA52A2A•23h ago•2 comments

If IPv4 were land

https://iptrust.co/blog/if-ipv4-were-land
152•rokostik•5h ago•163 comments

Launch HN: Simantic (YC F26) – Firmware Simulation for AI Agents

16•shong0504•1h ago•9 comments

What we know so far about Spain train crash

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm8xz7pkd0jjo
54•ZeljkoS•8h ago•104 comments

NetBSD adds a new text editor called atto

https://mastodon.sdf.org/@netbsd/117518160563539748
111•luke8086•5h ago•97 comments

How Google determines the names for bodies of water in Google Earth (2008)

https://publicpolicy.googleblog.com/2008/04/how-google-determines-names-for-bodies.html
183•terminalbraid•6h ago•150 comments

Mexico is a showroom for electric vehicles you can't buy in the U.S.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2026/10/27/i-saw-future-driving-mexico-its-off...
165•bookofjoe•2h ago•150 comments

Keplearn: Extract Equations from Data in Seconds

https://github.com/owls-on-wires/keplearn
45•owls-on-wires•3h ago•1 comments

StackOverflow now gets fewer than 1000 questions a month

https://data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/1926661#graph?t=1
721•babelfish•18h ago•631 comments

Qwenputer: A functioning, deterministic RISC-V CPU inside Qwen3.5

https://divagr.com/blog/qwenputer
664•csmantle•17h ago•139 comments

Java's new AOT cache feature is in a rough state

https://xpipe.io/blog/java-aot-cache
70•theanonymousone•3d ago•21 comments

16colo.rs – ANSI/ASCII art archive

https://16colo.rs/
18•memalign•1h ago•0 comments

If-then-else had to be invented (2020)

https://github.com/e-n-f/if-then-else/blob/master/if-then-else.md
123•theanonymousone•4d ago•141 comments

We won't "just hang out"

https://borretti.me/article/we-wont-just-hang-out
70•barry-cotter•11h ago•126 comments

The first wired XR glasses powered by Android XR

https://blog.google/products-and-platforms/platforms/android/xreal-aura/
74•yincrash•18h ago•60 comments

Why is this fingerprinting script creating bioweapons?

https://nullpt.rs/fingerprinting-bioweapons
1505•hazebooth•1d ago•284 comments

Zero click, silent, remote Android DoS

https://smsofdeath.com/
277•MarkBlah•10h ago•159 comments

‘You Are Done’: The letter sent to King by the F.B.I (2014)

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/magazine/what-an-uncensored-letter-to-mlk-reveals.html
376•surprisetalk•4h ago•288 comments

Getting debug access on a Brother printer over Telnet

https://inventor7777.github.io/blog/2026/10/22/debug-access-on-brother/
159•inventor7777•3d ago•48 comments

Newly discovered Kerberos delegation abuse path

https://hunio.org/security/abusing-constrained-delegation-without-protocol-transition-against-spn...
13•hunio•1d ago•1 comments
Open in hackernews

For the first time ever, Google Search is less than 50% of Alphabet's revenue

https://www.kadoa.com/companies/insights/google-search-below-half
177•hubraumhugo•1h ago

Comments

lab14•1h ago
Isn't this good news because they're diversifying their streams?
theplumber•1h ago
Google really had developed only 2 good products(not including acquisitions such as YouTube): search and gmail. Their primary cow to milk has been search. The rest (I.e cloud compute) is not really a moat. I think we are facing a revolution/rotation where the these companies may start to become just “old businesses”(I.e IBM, AOL).
jeffbee•1h ago
It's absurd to say that Google did not develop YouTube. They acquired it at a point where it was a galaxy-scale cash incinerator and made it work economically using their superior platform.
adam_arthur•1h ago
aka waited for cost of storage, bandwidth, compute to come down below revenue from advertising.

As it would have done naturally either way

jeffbee•59m ago
Google doesn't pay for transit. Their private glass was the whole reason the acquisition worked.
lokar•43m ago
And putting cache nodes in residential ISPs and exchanges all over the world.
TMWNN•55m ago
Only if revenue grew quickly enough.

When Google bought YouTube, it already had Google Video. Google saw that YouTube had market traction and pivoted quickly, to its (and YouTube's) credit.

mlmonkey•37m ago
Don't worry, they've put an Advertising guy in charge of Youtube, and he's busy inserting as many ads as possible into each and every video...
oblio•26m ago
People still don't see where this is going.

TV had both 15-20 minute of ad breaks every hour AND product placement during actual content.

That's where we're going in about 10-15 years.

mlmonkey•18m ago
Difference is, TV had (has) content in 30 minute chunks. But Youtube has, among others, Shorts, which are often 30 seconds. But still Neal Mohan wants to show ads on Shorts.

On top of these ads, creators are inserting their own ads ("this video is sponsored by ...."), so it's ads all the way down (like turtles).

christophilus•58m ago
Yeah. I was going to say. I really dislike Google, but what they did with YouTube (whose acquisition I saw as a mistake at the time) is impressive.
sebastiansm7•57m ago
Android, Maps and Chrome I use it almost daily for years. Dont know if are great at revenue, but are great products for me :)
reaperducer•51m ago
He specified "developed."

Google didn't create Android or Maps. Android was made in 2003 by other people. Maps was Keyhole and something made in Australia.

I don't know enough about Chrome to say.

bbor•47m ago

  Android was made in 2003 by other people.
Look I'm Google's #1 hater but this is just goofy lol. There are multiple buildings full of Android developers, and have been for at least a decade; to say that it's not "made" by them is a huge stretch. Technically all of their products are just ripoffs of Sun & Xerox, right? Or Turing & Church, I suppose!
phoghed•40m ago
Same with YouTube
chimeracoder•31m ago
When YouTube was acquired by Google, it was already pretty similar in shape as a product to what it is now. The biggest differences are scale, the addition of advertising, and ancillary integration with other Google services. The first is a function of growth, the second is exactly what Google would be expected to do to monetize the service, and the third is another logical implication of "acquisition". (You could quibble and say they added vertical shorts and live video, but I don't think those are even fundamentally different from a product perspective from what YouTube was already doing in 2006, just fast-forwarded to adapt to the consumer technology we have today).

That's very different from Android, which was an unreleased prototype that had zero users and was dramatically different even from what ended up shipping as the first product, let alone what it is today. Android at acquisition would be unrecognizable from what the majority of people worldwide are typing on this very minute.

TacticalCoder•56m ago
Not a moat and not big but... for SMEs "Google Workspace" is a godsend from outter space.

This is what allow little SMEs to not have to suffer that piece of shit that Windows is. I know people running their SMEs (and I helped them set up Google Workspace) from Mac and Chromebooks since years and years and who do not ever want to here again from anything Microsoft.

They're basically doing everything inside "Google Workspace" (formerly "G Suite", formerly "Google apps for domain" because Google's product naming is just confusing).

Gemini is also IMO excellent for everything that is not coding. It's really rare that I use Anthropic models (which I pay a subscription for) for anything else than coding.

GMail / Drive / Google Docs / Google Spreadsheets are great for a shitload of SMEs out there who want to give Windows and Office the middle finger.

baoooooooooooo•31m ago
By SME do you mean subject matter expert or Small-Medium sized enterprise?

I could make this make sense either way

oblio•27m ago
Businesses.
oblio•27m ago
> Gemini is also IMO excellent for everything that is not coding. It's really rare that I use Anthropic models (which I pay a subscription for) for anything else than coding.

I use Gemini Pro for every day stuff and Opus is much better than it. A lot more features and everything works better, especially in the websites. Gemini is just... dumber overall. I had a project/gem (now replaced by a skill) and sometimes I'd start with them and then veer of course along the way. Gemini would religiously follow the initial context, stupidly, while Opus realized that a good chunk if it wasn't needed anymore after my last prompt and did the right thing.

dyauspitr•53m ago
That’s nonsense. What about Maps, Sheets, Android, Meet, Chrome, Cloud etc. I don’t even know how you can exclude YouTube. It’s basically something they’ve worked on for more than a decade at this point. The number of google products we all use on a daily basis is pretty stunning.
LPisGood•53m ago
Google Pixel / Android are very popular. Chromebooks also did well.
mlmonkey•49m ago
What is Pixel's marketshare, for developed markets? Despite a decade+ of competing, have they made any significant dent in iPhone's share?
bbor•49m ago
I don't think the question of "good products" is really relevant here; the important aspect is profitable products. And in that arena, nothing beats the money printer!

They used to have a second minimint in AdSense et. al. ("Display Advertising"), but that shrinks by the year economy-wide as the vicious cycle of data tracking, ad blocking, and paywall dodging continues. Now it's a mere $7B[1], compared to $11B for Youtube (technically also Display Advertising but it gets its own segment now, I guess) and $63B from the money printer proper.

[1] Actual report here: https://s206.q4cdn.com/479360582/files/doc_financials/2026/q... Interestingly, display revenues are slightly up! But still, in Google land, "slightly up" is potentially a scandalous failure. Perhaps they settled into better agreements with big publishers ("sell side") after it became clear that they wouldn't actually be punished for having a Display Ads monopoly, despite losing the antitrust case brought by Biden's DoJ.

:(

edmundsauto•47m ago
Why separate out products developed internally versus acquired and growth? There is an almost moralistic element in the tone of “well they just bought it”. Sure, they bought it and grew it into a behemoth, plus what really matters is not the provenance but how much money it makes for them. Plus, it’s reasonable to call YouTube (and instagram, which also gets the same treatment) two of the all time best corporate acquisitions. It’s not easy to buy a company and grow it like that.
whakim•44m ago
I don't really agree: it's pretty simplistic to boil Google's history down to two products developed 20 years ago.

I'm not really sure why you say that cloud compute isn't a moat. It's an enormous investment to compete there; there's a reason even large companies buy compute from GCP/Azure/AWS or even if they have their own compute don't attempt to compete. Additionally, GCP has been an enormously successful 'bet' for Google over the past decade.

Google has also turned subscription revenue for their various services into a major revenue stream; it'd be hard to call those various services (Google Drive, Google Play, etc.) anything other than successful.

Chrome doesn't generate revenue by itself, but it certainly drives advertising revenue across the rest of Google's portfolio and was developed in-house.

Finally, it's pretty strange to credit the success of YouTube as a revenue stream with a small loss-making company that was acquired in 2006 rather than Google, who has run it for the past 20 years.

jgalt212•24m ago
> GCP has been an enormously successful 'bet' for Google over the past decade.

I disagree on this. It's not clear how much money they are actually making and how much revenues are shifted over from other business lines to GCP because GCP earnings growth is / was valued higher than other business lines by the markets.

whakim•14m ago
I mean, $11B in quarterly operating income ($33B in revenue) is clearly quite a lot. The only reasonable argument here is that this includes hardware sales (i.e. TPUs), but it is still a lot even if you subtract that. I think many folks internalized the narrative that GCP was an also-ran many years ago (when that was demonstrably true), but haven't updated their priors now that revenue is almost the same as (and may soon surpass) Azure's.
stpedgwdgfhgdd•31m ago
Working with GCP for 6 month now; AWS, with its own weird concepts, is superior. True enterprise.

As a simple example, a week ago we had the GCP outage in UK, their status page said all was good.

darkstar999•23m ago
Yeah, diversifying into supporting the Gaza genocide.

https://www.democracynow.org/2026/10/29/sofia_liguori_google...

dumberquestions•1h ago
Somewhat impressive that search share of revenue is 5% down, but search revenue is 12% up..
nerevarthelame•46m ago
While not negative, it seems that their total revenue and EPS was still lower than forecast, hence GOOG stock being down 15% today.
nostrademons•29m ago
Their earnings missed by almost 30%, which is pretty huge in the stock market.

I think the bigger concern is that earnings misses are very rare for GOOG, and historically they've been able to hit almost any target that Wall Street expects. Their past earnings misses were all related to major macroeconomic events (2020Q1, which was the COVID shutdowns, 2022 all year with inflation from COVID/Ukraine + rate hikes, and 2019Q3 with the taper tantrum from Fed rate hikes), and most of them were more in the 5% range. A 30% miss, particularly with slowing revenue growth in their core business despite almost full monetization of commercial queries, could indicate that the golden goose is disintegrating.

For that matter, GOOG has been extremely correlated with macroeconomic indicators since about 2018, which means investors in the rest of the stock market should probably watch out. It's likely we're already in recession but don't know it.

andriy_koval•24m ago
> Their earnings missed by almost 30%

which exactly earning number missed by 30%?..

nostrademons•20m ago
Earnings per share. Analyst expectations were for $3.01 and it came in at $2.12.
MattCruikshank•1h ago
Great, now they won't mind so much when we break Search out of Alphabet, because it's a monopoly... :D
phyzix5761•54m ago
There's nothing intrinsic about Google search that makes it a monopoly. Monopolies usually hold their position because regulations make it prohibitive for competitors to form or because they control a rare resource. Google search does neither of these two things. Its just a better product compared to everything else out there and the market reflects that.
brap•50m ago
A rational take, prepare to get downvoted to oblivion!
badreligion42•48m ago
Monopolies hold because companies engage in foul play to hold their monopolies. When Google goes out and pays Apple billions to default to Google Search, that is not a regulatory hurdle, nor is Google using its position as the Android platform maintainer and bundling Google Search with Play Services.
lokar•40m ago
The query logs and “permission” to crawl are both advantages vs startups.
nerdo•23m ago
You can't legally make a crawler to compete with Google anymore, it's explicitly stated in a lot of robots.txt's.
notatoad•1h ago
am i remembering correctly that "google cloud" in the earnings isn't just developer's google cloud bills (that's google cloud platform), it's also basically any product where a consumer or enterprise pays money to google for anything other than advertising - google drive storage, gemini pro, enterprise google workspace plans...
jeffbee•59m ago
Workspace is under cloud but consumer stuff like Google 1 plans have their own line item.
foxtr0t•59m ago
no, services is broken out separately.
happyopossum•56m ago
> basically any product where a consumer or enterprise pays money to google for anything other than advertising

Not exactly - the consumer stuff (subscriptions and devices) falls under services, while cloud covers GCP, Workspace, and enterprise-specific cloud services (like maps etc).

Basically if you pay for it with a monthly sub on a personal google account (including Gemini stuff like Ai pro) it's services.

[0]https://abc.xyz/investor/faqs-and-general-information/

steve1903•49m ago
Not quite. Google Cloud is GCP, Workspace and Gemini Enterprise. Consumer products subscriptions like Youtube premium, Google storage and even Gemini (consumer) fall under "Google subscriptions", which is part of Google Services
Legend2440•58m ago
Cloud computing is really a money printer right now. Amazon makes more from AWS than from their retail business, it's nearly 2/3rds of their profit.
reticulates•48m ago
Retail is just a bad business. The ad business is many times more profitable than cloud business because of the margins. Cloud isn’t a money printer when compared to advertising.
patmorgan23•42m ago
I mean that's been the case for like a decade (maybe not 2/3rds but AWS eclipses amazon.com long ago)
paul7986•54m ago
Gemini is terrible, it's trash especially after downgrading to the free version. I have to prompt it two to three times for it to understand what I am asking it. It seemed better when I was paying for it while it's free competitor models (the other 4) always answer me right away.
pcan77•45m ago
you're not really the ideal customer. They're probably going to market to enterprise people because Claude/ChatGPT will become too expensive when they IPO and won't have any other revenue stream unlike Google/MS.
sickmartian•39m ago
ding ding ding, I cannot see right now anyone else "winning" AI... I hope for a local future where this doesn't happen but otherwise... yeah
fendy3002•43m ago
AFAIK only gemini can retrieve youtube videos (chatgpt free cannot and claude IIRC cannot, plus claude do not have native video processing).

So if you need tl;dw or something to do with YouTube video, gemini is the most seamless

stefan_•31m ago
They can just fine (well, probably not the "ChatGPT free" interface, that thing can not do anything). It might just not go through a Google API.

Also, of course, before anyone even realized the game was on at Google, Anthropic and OpenAI already downloaded the entirety of YouTube.

freediver•43m ago
Pretty remarkable (in the age of AI) that search/ad revenue actually grew 12%. Anyone have a rational explanation why is that the case?
ryanjshaw•42m ago
I saw a post on X saying Google changed the ad auction pricing model, but I don’t know much about this to comment if it’s accurate.
mlmonkey•38m ago
This post? https://x.com/MaxAnderson/status/2080229375773941871
freediver•23m ago
Thanks, this does make sense.
whizzter•35m ago
For me Google has stayed as the default interface, if I need to ask a basic query (probably searches that don't yield much revenue but keeps me on Google), the results were becoming worse a 1-3 years ago but now the AI parts of Google is now good-enough(TM) that I mostly don't need to go to a separate interface, as long as users aren't fleeing they can probably continue to get paid for ADs (also the if YT ads are included, those have really become obnoxious but probably well monetized).
freediver•24m ago
gh-qq•43m ago
How would you expect search forecasts to be met if most of the time you get "are you a robot" or clanker summaries if you are lucky.

Search no longer works and you are killing your most important product with AI that nobody wants. If search worked like in 2010, no one would use AI answers.

6thbit•35m ago
Where is AI in this?

Search was $63.4B "Everything else" was $64.2B, out of which GCP was $30.7B

Is AI on the 33.5B remaining post GCP? or within the 30.7 of GCP?

InsideOutSanta•33m ago
AI revenue is folded into both search and cloud, depending on what exactly it is.
lifeisstillgood•7m ago
So if I understand it, search numbers are down (because AI is doing what Sam Altman originally saw - AI is a better search engine)

And Google knows it, so why not squeeze the current customers, whatever model AI takes it’s unlikely to be a word matching auction, this model is dead, grab the cash and go.

JumpCrisscross•5m ago
> search numbers are down

Source?

j45•5m ago
AI can definitely be a more natural experience for search, but it doesn't return better search results.
dzonga•7m ago
Google cloud could've been more if they didn't drop the ball.
sowhat1•53m ago
Shhh just let the Googlers believe they’re elite super geniuses when all they do is acquire successful tech like Android, YouTube, and on and on.

Everything they make from within flops 99% of the time.

kingleopold•40m ago
those geniuses that made acq. grow all have big retirement exit btw. Nobody in google worth low digit NW if they have been there for +10Y, so yeah they bet on their work and beat market for several years
DaSHacka•13m ago
>Android, YouTube

Before they acquired these, how were they doing? I'll give you a hint: they weren't exactly how we knew them today. Android was literally a concept and YouTube was bleeding money with no realistic path to profitability.

> Everything they make from within flops 99% of the time.

As do all inventions? Of course, you just don't hear about all the failings from individuals or smaller companies that went bust as a result. The important thing is the 1% that succeed are so successful it offsets the losses.

procone•34m ago
Android, Inc was 100% a Google acquisition from 2005. I thought this was a well known fact?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_%28operating_system%29...

bbor•30m ago
I... yes, I know. But see the entirety of my comment above, I guess?

To clarify in good faith: what percentage of Android development do you think went on before 2005 in, let's say, mythical man months. 5%? 1%? Less?

eloisant•44m ago
While Android is technically an acquisition, it was an unreleased prototype when they bought it.

It's safe to say Google brought Android to the level it is now.

vineyardmike•32m ago
It’s 2026, I would absolutely say Google “Developed” Google Maps and Android even if they did not “create” it originally. At what point can we attribute the success of these products to Google as a developer instead of Google the buyer.

Android had a market share of 0, with no released products when they bought it. The 80%+ market share today was all Google.

Google Maps was purchased (pre Google IPO), but the original (“Where2”) was a desktop application. Google completed rebuilt it alongside the acquisition of other data sources, and released the web page. Years later, they built a mobile app which became one of the biggest apps of all time. Should we not attribute that success to Google instead of the Australian startup building a desktop app?

deathanatos•49m ago
To be fair, the parent is excluding acquisitions:

> not including acquisitions

Of which only Chrome is in-house created. I wouldn't think Chrome brings in a lot of revenue, and these days I'd argue FF is a much better product.

edmundsauto•46m ago
I’m sure with Chrome, Google has smart people calculating the value of the data that they get from it. It doesn’t make money directly but it’s gotta be a huge money maker.
mlmonkey•34m ago
Chrome logs every site you visit with the mothership, and that is very valuable data to Google. That allows them to spot, in realtime, trending sites for example. They see what the users are doing on the Internet in realtime and act accordingly.
justinator•37m ago
I wouldn't call Chrome an acquisition, but it wasn't birthed at Google.
scottLobster•10m ago
As a FF user, I've had to fall back to Edge/Chrome many times because some obscure hospital telehealth portal or bank website or whatever has issues.

I want FF to be successful, but unfortunately it's not really up to Mozilla

andriy_koval•15m ago
Ok, this one happened because they invested into AI hardware build out. Actual operating income grew 30%+ q/q.
JumpCrisscross•7m ago
> Actual operating income grew 30%+ q/q

OI isn’t more “actual” than EPS. I remember back when Yahoo traded for less than cash and liquids [1] because investors didn’t trust management not to blow it on stupid shit.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/10/business/dealbook/how-to-...

andriy_koval•3m ago
google still highly profitable, so operation income indicates how healthy is business, and eps/net income indicates how agressively they reinvesting.
mlmonkey•38m ago
They have been juicing their numbers recently .... https://x.com/MaxAnderson/status/2080229375773941871
gregw2•34m ago
Wow, that X post is the most succinct but persuasive and damning thing I've read about Google's ad business developments in years (I don't watch it particularly closely.) Thanks!
ericmay•33m ago
Random anecdotes like this don't equate to "company juicing their numbers". You need much stronger evidence than that to make such an assertion. There are legal and financial ramifications for lying, companies are audited, there are official forms and documents that public companies must file. Of course a company can lie on those forms, but in the case of a company like Google you need extraordinary, factual evidence to make claims like "they've been juicing their numbers".

You basically have to say, everyone from the CEO/CFO, to the auditors, the financial analysts, the legal team, and all the way down are all lying and this random guy on Twitter is telling the truth. Sorry, not buying it.

jedberg•29m ago
No one in Google is lying. If what the person in the Twitter post says is true, then everyone at Google is telling the truth, and so is OP.

And given all the replies to that post on Twitter, it sounds like it's true.

lotsofpulp•29m ago
I don’t interpret “juicing” to imply illegal.
bagacrap•27m ago
Juicing is not the same as lying. Did you read the post?
ericmay•16m ago
In this context it's being used as tantamount to lying. "Juicing the numbers" implies that something is being misrepresented which is a form of lying.

Yes I read the post (please refer to HN guidelines on asking if people read something) and didn't find anything worthwhile there which is why I mentioned what I did.

Posting here for others asking about lying/juicing since I'm rate limited.

~~~~~

Lying on financial statements is in fact illegal. Juicing implies that some number is being misrepresented as higher than it otherwise would be which is a form of lying and thus would be illegal.

Obviously there are some gray areas - "we changed how we measure this" or something along those lines can be considered "juicing" or just a matter of changing a calculation to make more sense, but the broad accusation is extraordinary and requires much more evidence than some random person on Twitter saying some things. As an investor in Google (individually and through ETFs) it has no bearing on any investment thesis I have because I don't care what random nobodies on the Internet say and neither should you.

mlmonkey•25m ago
See the replies to that tweet. I agree, one swallow does not a spring make; but here there's a pattern. Ask anybody who does search advertising, and you'll hear the same story too many times for it to just be a coincidence.
JumpCrisscross•9m ago
> See the replies to that tweet

Social media replies regularly confirm all kinds of nonsense.

jedberg•30m ago
You should submit this as its own story. This is big if true, so they say (and based on the replies, it is true).
andriy_koval•27m ago
They can't juice, because advertisers are now good in calculating conversion rate, roas, cpa, etc, so they would shift budgets to other channels like overnight if see Google underperforming.
cyanydeez•21m ago
what channel actually provides most of these ad buys that would satisfy their ad dollars?

Google has been sued for being a monopoly, and it's not because they're just really good. It's because there's basically no other market that hits any of the dollar costs.

andriy_koval•13m ago
> what channel actually provides most of these ad buys that would satisfy their ad dollars?

advertisers decide which channel justifies.

They still bring 250B ads dollars to google search, meaning it provides more than 250B value to them,

cyanydeez•9m ago
so no.
andriy_koval•7m ago
meta earns lots of money too
jcfrei•18m ago
Of course the big spenders on Google with the multi-million dollars advertising budgets won't just change their spending behaviour over night. That takes time - like anything in big corporations.
morkalork•18m ago
Gotta love seeing the complaint calling out "exact match (close variant)". Google sure does love text embeddings because it massively increases the keyword-search matches for auctions. After all these years, they definitely have no intention of fixing it for the advertisers.
jareklupinski•13m ago
can confirm; ive started getting advertisements explicitly meant for dentists

im very far from dentistry

boilerupnc•6m ago
https://xxcancel.com/MaxAnderson/status/2080229375773941871
cush•4m ago
If this is true how is it not fraud or just regular old theft?
keeda•4m ago
“Recently”?? Have people not seen the findings of the AdTech Antitrust lawsuit they lost? Y’all should google it (heheh) especially the ad auction rigging parts of it, including Project Bernanke.

What they’re doing now is just being a lot more overt about it, because they want to carve up their old cash cow to feed their AI ambitions before ChatGPT and Claude eat it up first.

LogicFailsMe•28m ago
So replacing actual organic search results with hallucinating AI summaries reduced profitability? Oh no!
stephen_cagle•4m ago
I (and a non trivial number of people I knokw) have switched to Kagi for search just to avoid having to deal with the bullshit that is the above the fold google search results.

Course, they win anyway because I also pay for youtube premium to avoid seeing ads..

Feels like the world is becoming a split between people who can afford not to be the product and people who cannot.

eviks•21m ago
You forgot to exclude the "not usual" factors that allow monopolies to hold their position to rule Google out of the group.

For example, non-regulatory attempts at blocking of competitors, which Google does engage in due to their dominant position in mobile (of course, that's also just another better product)

xnx•43m ago
"Search" is a borderline obsolete concept. There is no separation between search, AI, information retrieval, knowledge synthesis, information tasks, etc.
stefan_•33m ago
Others want to nitpick but generally yes, before we had AI, the last craze was cloud, so they shuffled things around to the point that everything was "cloud". This is also how Oracle got to be the biggest "cloud" in the world!
But you are not clicking on ads? And they aren't (yet?) in AI overviews?
andriy_koval•20m ago
> that search/ad revenue actually grew 12%

it grew compared to q3 2025, but it is flat (0% grows) compared to q2 2026.

andriy_koval•10m ago
Big spenders already do not bid on google directly, but balance budgets automatically between multiple platforms and channels base on performance
morkalork•16m ago
What other channels? The alternative on search is Bing and it's a tiny market. Then there's display which is total dog shit.
andriy_koval•11m ago
Ads is highly fragmented market, google has yt, display, mobile ads, there are tons of other platforms (meta, linkedin) where you can advertise.

That first price auction complain is bs, advertisers will just stop bidding $5 for top click and start bidding $1.1 in his example to hit their goals.

mlmonkey•12m ago
There's a reason why GSP (Generalized Second Price) auctions are called "truthful auctions", and that's because they elicit the true value as the bid from the advertiser (in theory).

So (in theory) advertisers will lower their bids if they're not getting the desired value from the clicks; and over time some will migrate budgets to other channels (like "influencers"? shudder ...).