Submitted 2 days ago by Davriellelouna@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.cnet.com/tech/us-wants-judge-to-break-up-google-force-sale-of-chrome-heres-what-to-know/
outdated news from may 2nd, in fact today a judge ruled that google won’t have to sell chrome or android, and they can keep paying mozilla/apple for being the default search engine
BUT, they will have to share search data publicly, and the default search engine deals can’t be exclusive anymore
Google bribes trump, agrees to place pro-trump search results higher. Nothing happens to Google.
I hate to say it, but unless Chrome becomes an open source project, I’d rather that it be owned by Google. No other company that could make money on a browser should own Chrome.
I don’t trust the US government to do literally anything right with this, and I’m kinda surprised Google didn’t already gift an underage child to Trump so he’d make the problem go away.
However a perfectly viable option that I’m sure the previous government looked into would be to entrust Chromium (which is Open-Source though not copyleft) to a new, independent nonprofit made of Google’s former chromium team led and paid for by a consortium of the major commercial chromium users (Google, Microsoft, etc.). It would be in everyone’s best interest to share the relatively small financial burden so that Chromium can remain decent and competitive.
This wouldn’t be anything revolutionary. This approach of financing an independent open-source project as a “common good” is basically how the Linux kernel has been developed for many years now, most Linux code is written by corporate sponsors.
Chromium :3
News from The Government!
Going forward you can now only search and browse the web by mail!
Isn’t that great?
Some guy in the government… I got another request for titties. Have we organized the titties files yet? The request is pretty clear… Larger than C cup but smaller than triple D.
“Sorry, we’ve all looked through those files a lot but no one has had time to alphabetize them yet!”
Are you feeling lucky? Here is a bunch of random stuff regarding the term tits:
Google has said it didn’t maintain a monopoly through such agreements and that consumers could change their device defaults to use other search engines.
It’s not complete truth. I use librewolf because you can set search engine to custom. In chrome you can only pick from predefined. With this fact Google controls it’s competition.
What would happen if you disabled all connections on a Tesla? Or put it in some kind of Faraday cage? Would it just shut itself down, or would it keep running in its current state?
WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
and android… right? RIGHT??
hansolo@lemmy.today 2 days ago
Please. PLEEEEEEEEASE!
Turret3857@infosec.pub 2 days ago
The problem is that I feel android being sold would give it to a closed source entity. Ideally, a judge would make it so AOSP goes to a nonprofit governing body independent of any corporation, but I have a strong feeling that is not what will happen (in the US).
jollyrogue@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
Yeah, MS would probably buy Android to get back into the mobile market.
I agree. Ideally, Android would be something like Debian or a mobile project of the Linux Foundation. It would really be better off if it wasn’t beholden to a company.
The mobile OS wars have already settled on Android and iOS. Closing off Android would destroy the market, and I don’t want to go back to the days when Windows Mobile was the leading mobile OS.
Odds are low of anything good happening because of this administration.
poopkins@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Android would be unprofitable and unsustainable in isolation. So that would leave each OEM to build their own thing, but to make a long story short, everybody would just get an iPhone. So then I wonder, if making such a ruling would create the void for a monopoly, what’s the sense?
jollyrogue@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
It could be profitable the way RHEL or the Mozilla Foundation is profitable.
Companies will pay for OS support, and companies will pay for access. Android as a foundation with a company selling OS support and services which could be rebranded would be profitable.
I’m thinking about the wider IoT space here beyond only mobile.
Deflated0ne@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Deal.
Lets get a whole bunch of different OS. That compete with each other.
generallynonsensical@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Because Tim Cook gave Trump a trophy.
HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 2 days ago
Android could be profitable if Google Play Services went with it. However, that doesn’t exactly fix the monopoly problems associated with Android.