this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2023
264 points (99.6% liked)

Technology

59030 readers
3070 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


New documents revealed during the historic monopoly trial over the past week seem to lend more weight to the latter argument, and they could help explain why Google’s once dazzling search results anecdotally feel like they are getting worse for some.

Those comments are important because, as Bloomberg points out, Google was known for erecting clear barriers distancing the product side of search from the advertising wing so that the former can focus on constantly improving user experience.

Instead, he reportedly met with Raghavan and the two agreed to replace queries with a new metric measuring “groups of queries.” Still, the exchange highlights the inherent tensions that can arise between the product and advertising teams and their at times conflicting goals.

Internal Google notes of a meeting between Sundar Pichai and Apple CEO Tim Cook released Monday by the DOJ give an interesting insight into that relationship.

“I need monthly reports of all losses to key competitors on an ongoing basis and if anyone from search to Apple, please email me directly on every individual case.” Pichai wrote according to the recently released documents.

Diane Rulke, an organizational behavior professor at Carnegie Mellon recently told the New York Times she believed the public’s lack of access to relevant information was “unprecedented in antitrust trials.”


The original article contains 1,668 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 87%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!