AI start-up Perplexity makes surprise bid for Google Chrome

Comments

• Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  If Google is forced to sell Chrome, is anything stopping them from simply developing another Chromium based browser and immediately beginning to siphon customers from what is now the competition?

  Because that seems to be something that would seriously limit the value of the browser.

  source

  • Dagnet@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    The sale often includes a period during which the one selling can’t create a similar product again to compete with what they sold

    source

    • Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      That typically happens when the seller actually wants to sell though.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • ayyy@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    I have some personal experience with this! In the Before Times, an anti-trust action like this would also involve a many-year agreement by Google to an oversight committee composed of some engineers and business/economics people. Google would be forced to listen to the panel and enable any follow-ups. The “or else” was typically so astronomical it would be business-ending.

    But that was back when we had the rule of law.

    source
  • neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    They would just invest a bunch of money into a browser and be forced to sell it.

    I’d like to see them just open source it.

    source

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Chromium already is open source.

      source
• fubarx@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  It’s a gimmick to get publicity. But if it happens, the company has to generate revenue to pay it off.

  Guess how browser makers make money off a ‘free’ product?

  source

  • phoenixz@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Especially AI companies

    source
• HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Google, being evil: "Sold!"

  source
• dataprolet@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  In cash?

  source