[devnullbrain]

>I can think of these companies which have the resources to take over Chrome...

Exactly, who on Earth could build a competitor? You're describing the problem!

The ability to take stunning losses each year without worry, knowing that it pays dividends in the value to search, ensures competition can't flourish. So it is anti-competitive.

[throwinothrside]

I am definitely not a google fan here. In fact a privacy nerd. But if they sell it off like this, it will hurt consumers more.

We need to make Google play by the rules so that we can set an example for the rest. Not recreate the same problem with another company so that we will have to do the same after a decade all over again.

Cos at that point, nothing will change for the consumers except the brand logo of the company that is doing crazy things.

[devnullbrain]

Nor am I advocating that these companies take it over.

If it can't stand on its own, it's not competing fairly.

[throwinothrside]

Sure. In an ideal world. But let's be real here. FB or Microsoft or Amazon will buy it. Do the same shi*y things google were doing (in fact, probably more) and consumers will have even more worse experience. Cos only these companies have the resources.

Not to mention, Its impossible for Chrome to be a standalone business without being even more outrageous to consumers. And they will be even more evil against users. Mark my words.

If we do this like this, we are just replacing the logos of companies that own Chrome. Not the end result. We need to fix the root cause.