Comments by "XSportSeeker" (@XSpImmaLion) on "Google finally gets sued by Department of Justice for monopoly behavior" video.

  1. Honestly? I think it's neither... really. Not to be a contrarian, but perhaps to present another hypothesis - I think the way Google does this sort of approval process is bad because there is no strong policies set in place, no real due process, and no auditing. Or they do have policies set in place, but it's not enforced, because of the environment. It's extremely arbitrary, to the point of it probably depending on the judgement of very unqualified people who actually don't do much cross checking to know what they are doing, and it's done in minutes because these people are underpaid, overworked, and have no real reason or background to do a good job. Only a theory, but let me explain the logic. First, you can see from Google products and support in different areas that there is no real cross communication when it comes to some of their biggest investments in the past few years. In Rossman's case, sure, if he does the cross checking, it's self evident that the ad should be there. But I highly doubt that whoever looked at his ad submission did it, have the time to do it, or cares enough to do anything like that. Look at Google reviews, YouTube ranking, etc? Nope. He or she will likely rely on some general guideline, potentially made out of prejudice, and put out an arbitrary decision out in seconds which is the time that person has to do it. It's a company that can't even analyze past projects before firing up new services, apps and projects, they apparently can't even do simple market research, study what was the problem of past failed projects, and take lessons from active successful services. It's really like several startups shooting crap, and management arbitrarily terminating stuff left and right. So you end up with a disjointed mess of stuff with little to no commitment. It's like a company with 10000 little groups that do not communicate with each other and keeps shooting crap blind. A school science fair with free theme is more coordinated than that. Google has become something like a WeWork of projects - no correlation, no moto, no mission statement, no rules for commitment, just shooting the crap, with tons of money and zero objective or focus. When a company is this disjointed on public facing, important products that directly affect their bottomline, that should matter for the company and it's investors, and that should be their mission statement, you can be 100% sure it's gonna be several times worse when it comes to stuff like costumer service, analysis of advertisement submissions made by small businesses, general reporting, content flagging, copyright strike analysis, general user communications, etc. Because ultimately, as a company Google doesn't care much about it. It became an amorphous blob sucking the tits of the older more successful, estabilished projects. On one hand, you can understand why huge corporations like Google, Microsoft, Apple and others act the way they do. They are too f*cking big. It's the usual cognitive dissonance that happens when you work in a company that makes products for millions to billions of people, but you are so big and so disconnected from your public that you can't recognize what matters to them. Inside work, people inside these corporations are worried with either listening to the bosses, or to investors. And both categories can as well be living in another planet, it wouldn't make a difference. Their reality is so completely different from ours that they are basically another species. You can bet adsense, much like YouTube, only really gives significant time for the highest grossing or paying people. Top 100 YouTubers, top 100 advertisement companies, etc. The rest get whatever treatment allocated for the masses, and this will never change. When you understand how out of touch with everyday reality that people like Zuck, the Google brothers, Tim Apple, or even lots of the people working in those companies are, self absorbed in their own bubbles, you start understanding why so many ex-employees of those companies gets out of their Sillicon Valley reality shield and creates ridiculously stupid startups that goes nowhere, like that Bodega shit, or that Juicero crap. How can people get together, convince a ton of investors, draw money, and try to put together products that are so obviously stupid for the general market? It's because they live in another reality. These products makes perfect sense inside the bubble created around Sillicon Valley. Overpriced hipster vending machines, and an overpriced overengineered press that only works for overpriced frozen fruit packages. Also, because of the insane volumes of everything they have to process everyday, quality and interpersonal treatment dies off. Whatever processes Google still does in relation to costumer service that still involves people in the middle, they will pay the least possible and shove as much work as they can on individuals. These corporations usually have extremely strong non disclosure agreements, but you can search to see how the cracks are showing. Facebook, Google and YouTube employees with PTSD, ex-employees talking about hellish work conditions, long hours, and crazy stress levels, etc etc. When it's not completely outsourced to developing countries, what you'll get with costumer service like jobs is probably worse than the average telemarketer with a quota to fill. Now, do I discard malicious intent and the other markers of monopoly practices? Of course not. You think a corporation this big and this disjointed wouldn't also have several problems regarding corruption, malicious practices, and all sorts of other things? Again, it comes with this sort of insane scale. Google single handely dominates a huge Internet economy that has been engulfing real life economy ever faster and steadily for years now. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Here's the problem though. What I see in monopoly cases like this one is a repeat of european courts monopoly cases of the past, like the one against Microsoft. It targets these large corporations because they are the easy targets. Particularly now with an administration that is quick to the draw against any business it perceives as being against it, which is the wrong reasoning to do it. The accusations against Microsoft back then were ridiculous, not because the practices weren't bad, but because basically all other giant tech corporations were doing exactly the same thing Microsoft was being accused of. And in the end, this didn't stop the practice, this didn't change the market, this didn't solve the problem, and the huge fine those corporations get can usually be paid with the profit they make in 3 months or less, at most. Because there is one big component of the problem that never changes, and that is it's users. Google keeps forever amassing profits because people just keep using Google, despite an insane number of reasons not to, that is not limited to monopoly practices. People are paying to have their privacy eroded, putting devices with cameras and microphones inside their homes that are sure to harvest valuable personal data, advertisers will keep going to Google regardless of results of this lawsuit, no one will care to adopt other search engines like Bing, DuckDuckGo, or whatever, because status quo and convenience is always speaking higher than anything. Really... these days, I don't think there is anything that can happen to break these monopolies, outside of them self imploding by some miracle. They can be as anti-consumer as they want, they can create shady parallel economies based on harvesting private and personal data, they can create data collection devices for people to happily buy, they can collude with big corporate competitors to force smaller ones out, they can buy and dismantle any interesting competition, they can pay to acquire the costumer base of other services and applications whose costumers explicitly hate them, nothing is outside their reach. Late stage capitalism umbeatable monsters. I'm not even sure WWIII would beat them, if it was waged directly against them. But you be the judge, here on a YouTube video commenting section.
    1