EU launches antitrust probe into Google searches


Recommended Posts

Google should just temporarily shut down their services in the EU and put up a page that says to contact the EU government if they are unhappy with the decision.

In some cases this antitrust stuff makes sense (eg. the poster above me) but in this case it doesn't. Companies shouldn't be punished for being way better than the competition.

Yes, this would definitely be the best response to an investigation.

I wish you were in charge of google.

I like EU and what they are doing despite what some of you are saying. If you didn't know a big part of Google revenue comes from UK :whistle: . Also someone should watch out for the Big companies, because they sometimes think they cannon be touched so they do what they want. This wouldn't happen if Google followed it's "don't be evil" policy. :p

Google should just move their offices outside of the EU, then they can tell them to stfu as there's nothing they can do, unless they want to block the domain and I'm sure that would go over great..

EU should look at Apple's App Store, then they could be useful at least one time. So far they haven't done anything useful. Windows Vista and 7 N editions (without WMP) was fail because no one wanted to buy this. Browser ballot screen also is nothing in my opinion ...

Just out of curiosity, were you as vocal when the United States government lead the way in prosecuting and convicting Microsoft? The EU just followed America's lead.

Google operates in most EU countries and so have to follow their laws. They are not a US-only operation.

the U.S. never charged them 2.16 billion dollars for daring to appeal the case.

Google should just move their offices outside of the EU, then they can tell them to stfu as there's nothing they can do, unless they want to block the domain and I'm sure that would go over great..

If they want to do business in the uk, it doesn't matter where their offices are.

And FYI, anti-trust cases are good for end users, and this is just an investigation. If someone files a complaint the EU have to make an investigation, some of the people here seem to be under the impression that the EU just decided to do this under their own volition. If you want to bitch at the EU, wait until their findings are made public.

Google is the worst offending company by a long way in terms of monopoly abuse. After acquiring YouTube, it started to aggressively push YouTubu video results at the top of search result pages, which helped YouTube destroy competitors like MetaCafe. Nowadays Google has started advertising for its own products like Google Chrome browser at the home page -- another clear monopoly abuse.

It's a good thing that finally this evil company is coming under the scrutiny of antitrust regulators.

How is advertising its browser on the homepage monopoly abuse?

Oh **** off EU.

Uh, why? The authorities have an obligation to look into reports of illegal practices. Do you think the authorities should simply ignore all reports?

look at who's out of money again. looks like they spent microsoft's cache. google is an online service they should just continue running it from within the U.S. and give the finger to the E.U. *******.

What are you talking about? Microsoft wasn't fined in the previous antitrust case. The only time they were fined was when they refused to follow the law after the antitrust case in 2004. This has got nothing to do with money. It has to do with enforcing the law.

And Google should pull out of the EU, one of the biggest markets in the world? Right.

Just what I thought, nice timing
E.U. is skint as it has been bailing out Greece, Spain, Portugal and E.I.R.E. so it needs a new cash-cow.

Was Microsoft, now it is Google.

You know, the ignorance and bigotry is really amazing. The EU didn't even fine Microsoft last time. So much for your conspiracy theories, eh?

Maybe you should go back to posting in 9/11 threads and talk about how the moon landings were faked.

EU should look at Apple's App Store, then they could be useful at least one time. So far they haven't done anything useful. Windows Vista and 7 N editions (without WMP) was fail because no one wanted to buy this. Browser ballot screen also is nothing in my opinion ...

Actually, the browser ballot screen was Microsoft's own idea. Also, that antitrust case did help because it forced Microsoft to reverse its positions on standards in IE.

I swear someone should just buy the company and shut it down once and for all.

So should someone shut down Microsoft and Google?

I mean, since both of them have filed antitrust complaints against each other...

Or is it fine when Google or Microsoft file antitrust complaints, but not when someone else does it?

Google should just move their offices outside of the EU, then they can tell them to stfu as there's nothing they can do, unless they want to block the domain and I'm sure that would go over great..

Yeah, Google should act like a crybaby, and lose billions in revenue from one of the biggest markets on the planet. Good idea.

I don't mind, I think its a good thing that the EU regulates monopolies.

Although just because they are investigating, doesn't mean google have done anything wrong.

Also....

The European Commission on Saturday said it was putting an end to an investigation of Apple's app policies. Competition Policy VP Joaquín Almunia claimed that Apple had relaxed iPhone development rules in direct response to EU investigations. Apple's move was characterized as proof change could be voluntary.

"Apple's response to our preliminary investigations shows that the Commission can use the competition rules to achieve swift results on the market with clear benefits for consumers, without the need to open formal proceedings," Almunia said.

Read more: http://www.electroni.../#ixzz16u4WFQ7B

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!