Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by luckydata 410 days ago
It's such a ridiculous proposal that would completely destroy Google's business. If that's the goal fine, but let's not pretend that any of those remedies are anything beyond a death sentence.
4 comments

If they're dominating or one of only two or three important options in multiple other areas and the index is the only reason... I mean, that's a strong argument both that they're monopolists and that they're terrible at allocating the enormous amount of capital they have. That's really the only thing keeping them around? All their other lines of business collectively aren't enough to keep them alive? Yikes, scathing indictment.
> It's such a ridiculous proposal that would completely destroy Google's business.

it won't. My bet is that bing and some other indexes are 95% Ok for average Joe. But relevance ranking is much tougher problem, and "google.com" is household brand with many other functions(maps, news, stocks, weather, knowledge graph, shopping, videos), and that's what is foundation of google monopoly.

I think this shared index thing will actually kill competition even more, since every players will use only index owned by google now.

At this point, why are you so concerned about Google's business?

This was 10 years ago. I could argue a moral Superior that Google possessed over Microsoft and Facebook, but man those days are looooooong gone.

I don't know, I don't think it will.

I mean, they're still going to be the number 1 name in adtech and analytics. And they're still gonna have pretty decent personalized ads because of analytics.

Plus, that just one part of their business. There's also Android, which is a money printing machine with the Google Store (although that's under attack too).

Really? Google would still have an astonishingly large lead in the ad markets.
Not sure how they could hold lead in case they lose search traffic.