TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why we're saying no to Google

204 点作者 Yrlec将近 6 年前

12 条评论

cameronbrown将近 6 年前
Sorry, but this really is the best way to go about this. What&#x27;s the alternative?<p>1. Random list of all search engines - most of which may be far worse&#x2F;less advanced&#x2F;more evil (read: poor &amp; desperate) than Google.<p>2. Hand picked list by Google? If you want neutrality, then you are joking... Right?<p>3. &#x27;Independent&#x27; committee who decide every so often - I&#x27;m not against this, but who&#x27;s going to fund this? I can guess the two main companies in a whim (cough: Google, Microsoft). This is basically a less-transparent auction.<p>4. Auction-based. You call it &#x27;selling off to the highest bidder&#x27;, I call it allocation of limited resources - let&#x27;s call this what it is, an advert.<p>5. Android switches to a paid model, Google completely closes off the platform and charges carriers directly for their services.<p>I really do like what Ecosia is doing but consider this:<p>1. Google is not cutting off your ability to download Ecosia - there are still dozens of search engines in the Play Store.<p>2. Ecosia benefits from Google Play infrastructure without having to contribute back because it&#x27;s free for developers. Obviously Google benefits from having mindshare&#x2F;user base, but there&#x27;s still a lot of value for developers that Apple charges far more for.<p>I think Google should have given Android users a choice long ago, but I don&#x27;t believe it&#x27;s completely fair to call this auction move &#x27;evil&#x27;.<p>What else could they do?
评论 #20683617 未加载
评论 #20683334 未加载
评论 #20683434 未加载
评论 #20683365 未加载
评论 #20689838 未加载
评论 #20683414 未加载
评论 #20684067 未加载
chupa-chups将近 6 年前
This sounds like &#x27;I want money by being &quot;not google&quot; and thus people have to like me&#x27;.<p>The linked website doesn&#x27;t point to anything else but that they&#x27;re allegedly planting trees for (an unknown percentage of the money collected by) showing ads to users. Which is nice, but if you want that I support tree planting initiatives explicitly (which I do), why don&#x27;t you just encourage someone doing just that, maybe by pointing out sites which actually encourage to do that, like <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.plant-for-the-planet.org" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.plant-for-the-planet.org</a>?
评论 #20682482 未加载
评论 #20681553 未加载
评论 #20682418 未加载
评论 #20681346 未加载
评论 #20683416 未加载
评论 #20684183 未加载
stakhanov将近 6 年前
This thing doesn&#x27;t address the problem it was actually meant to address which is to stop an anticompetitive practice. The spirit of the law in relation to antitrust is that you can&#x27;t abuse a monopoly in one market to gain a monopoly in another. That&#x27;s why it wasn&#x27;t acceptable that Google&#x27;s Android would set Google to be the default search engine and offer no other options.<p>Now Google says to those other search engines: Hey, you CAN be the default. But you&#x27;re going to have to give us ALL your profits.<p>How is that any less anti-competitive than what they were doing before?<p>Footnote: Why am I saying ALL of their profits? Well it&#x27;s four slots. Google is going to be one of them. Microsoft and Yahoo are going to bid whatever it takes to be on the list. -- Now there&#x27;s ONE slot left for everyone who isn&#x27;t part of the existing search oligopoly like Ecosia, Qwant, DuckDuckGo and so forth.<p>Now imagine if this was open outcry: Ecosia bids X dollars. Qwant outbids them by offering X+1 dollars for that fourth slot. Well: If Ecosia knows they would still be profitable even if they had to pay X+2 dollars, that&#x27;s what they&#x27;re going to bid, isn&#x27;t it? They hit a limit only at the point where they know that the deal would turn unprofitable. The guy that gets the slot would, in open outcry, end up paying the next guy&#x27;s profit plus one dollar. But that&#x27;s not the model. They&#x27;re doing sealed bids and you&#x27;ll have to actually pay what you bid, so... -- That&#x27;s why I&#x27;m saying ALL their profit.
评论 #20683838 未加载
bubble_talk将近 6 年前
If you are going to go after Google, you really should do a much better job. And there are <i>very good reasons</i> to reduce Google&#x27;s dominance, but this whiny approach isn&#x27;t helping.<p>1 Don&#x27;t be a thin wrapper around an inferior search engine. Apparently Bing cannot index &quot;JS only&quot; websites. [1] Improve your search quality first. Unless your search quality is remarkable in at least some small niche, you are probably not even going to get on the radar.<p>2 &quot;Google is trying to create artificial scarcity&quot; - As others in this thread have pointed out, no search engine is actually <i>blocked</i> on Android devices to the best of my knowledge. Android setup screen is completely Google&#x27;s prerogative, and if you don&#x27;t want to participate in the auction, fine. Save the money for better things (see point 4).<p>3 &quot;Purpose-driven search engines will be crowded out by profit-hungry rivals&quot; If you use Bing, aren&#x27;t you already supporting non-&quot;purpose driven&quot; search engines? Is Bing&#x27;s purpose somehow superior to Google&#x27;s purpose? If all search engines became &quot;purpose driven&quot;, you can be pretty damn sure that the quality will take a big hit.<p>4 Focus on getting word of mouth in more intelligent ways, less expensive ways. Why not go after Google where they are <i>actually vulnerable</i>? So many popular independent websites get hit randomly by all kinds of Google updates. Make no mistake, a lot of them would be very happy to promote alternative search engines. Find these websites, build relationships with the people who run them, and sponsor their work. It is just as important a mission in my view, plus who will say no to a chance to promote a good cause (assuming Ecosia.org are running everything on the up-and-up)<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=20605484" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=20605484</a>
评论 #20699477 未加载
mhkool将近 6 年前
This behaviour of Google shows that the fines of the EU are still not high enough.
评论 #20681804 未加载
0wis将近 6 年前
I’m not sure to understand why google has to discriminate itself on its own products...? If you are not happy with Google products, you still have the choice to buy an other smartphone. And you can change your search engine afterwards anyway. Its already a huge shot in the feet to propose other search engines upon installation.
评论 #20684612 未加载
评论 #20699620 未加载
deogeo将近 6 年前
&gt; By artificially limiting user options, Google is creating scarcity where there is none.<p>Does this refer to only the default selections screen, or will users be unable to choose a search provider that doesn&#x27;t participate in the auction? I.e. there&#x27;s no &quot;other&quot; option to type in a URL?
评论 #20681186 未加载
评论 #20682454 未加载
brainless将近 6 年前
I think we are looking at this the wrong way. It is not about other competitors, it is how much daily users will not move away from Google search.<p>If the startup advice about &quot;build a product your users will love&quot; is true then we certainly are not seeing a compelling competitor. A few good efforts are there, including DDG, but none with mass appeal.<p>Just non-cooperating with Google does not solve the issue. Even Ecosia, from comments in this thread, seems to have unclear resources and mission. So why should I as a user use them? Are they also not simply using marketing tactics instead of building an awesome product? Which, BTW, is mindbogglingly difficult.
blue_devil将近 6 年前
There_is_no_scarcity. Mobile screens are not that small. 1) a list of all search engines b)&quot;search for your search engine&quot; c) no default search set at all, people add it themselves.
skybrian将近 6 年前
Looks like there are three spots. Oddly, Google is using a first-price auction rather than their more usual second-price auction [1]. I wonder why?<p>In any case, it seems weird not to submit a bid at all. There must be some price above zero that&#x27;s worth it to them?<p>[1] &quot;Google will use a first-price sealed-bid auction to select the other general search providers that appear in the choice screen. Google will conduct auctions on a per-country basis for the period from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020. Following the initial round of auctions, any subsequent rounds will occur once per year.&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.android.com&#x2F;choicescreen&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.android.com&#x2F;choicescreen&#x2F;</a>
评论 #20683233 未加载
评论 #20682952 未加载
chrisco255将近 6 年前
I feel pretty strongly that Google (and Apple) should be forced to offer a choice for default search engine on their mobile devices. Microsoft was pretty handily sued and accused of antitrust for not offering this option on Windows desktop browsers. Google benefitted a great deal from that and it only makes sense that they should have to play by the same rules.
评论 #20682809 未加载
评论 #20682813 未加载
评论 #20683188 未加载
Causality1将近 6 年前
&gt;Android users deserve the option to freely choose their search engine, and that choice should not be auctioned off to the highest bidder.<p>Man, Google is getting some SERIOUS mileage out of removing &quot;Don&#x27;t Be Evil&quot; from their mission statement.
评论 #20682563 未加载