[londons_explore]

> 1) a record of searches and user clicks for the past 20 years

If a government was serious about getting more players in the search industry, they would force Google (and all other players) to make this data public.

Simply say "All user-behaviour data used to improve the service must be freely published".

Make the law apply to any web service with more than 20 million users globally so small businesses aren't burdened.

If the data cannot be published for privacy reasons, the private parts must be seperated and not used by google or it's competitors.

[klntsky]

Imagine the amount of bureaucratic burden these proposals would impose (even for small business, cause it is not obvious how to count users, etc.).

> the private parts must be seperated

This means literally making legal interpretation of all documents on the net, to determine whether each of them is private or not.

[creato]

> If the data cannot be published for privacy reasons, the private parts must be seperated and not used by google or it's competitors.

As a user that notices the impact of this data: please no, thanks though.

Have you ever visited youtube's home page in incognito mode? It's... bad. Really bad. Not allowing any company to use this (obviously very private) information in ranking would simply make their products suck, horribly, compared to today.

[vharuck]

>Have you ever visited youtube's home page in incognito mode?

Do you like the personalized recommendations because of channel subscriptions?

I always get the "anonymous default" home page with YouTube and don't care. The home page is just a wasted load before I can start typing in the search bar. As a bonus, staying incognito means all the videos on the right-side panel are related to the current video. Not related to a music video I have playing in another tab.