this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
1075 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

59679 readers
3610 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
 

Judge in US v. Google trial didn’t know if Firefox is a browser or search engine::Google accused DOJ of aiming to force people to use “inferior” search products.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 4 points 1 year ago

When you have technical cases like this, a good expert witness can explain everything like the judge is five. I like to consider myself tech literate enough to know the basics.

This is about how Google used technology (algorithms) and it's buying power to cement it's monopoly.

From the DoJ's pre-trial brief.

First, Google designed its ad auction algorithms to include adjustable variables (internally known as “pricing knobs”);...Google has also reduced advertisers’ visibility into where and why Google displays ads, impeding advertisers’ ability to optimize advertising and lower costs.....Google knows that a search engine “get[s] better as you have more users” because its quality improves on metrics such as personalization, refinements, and the ability to decipher what the user is searching for “Large-scale machine learning[,]”

Start throwing in technical jargon about how the ad algorithm works, and even the most technical lay person is going to shrug their shoulders and go "I dunno, sounds like magic".

Other expert witnesses will still have to explain how Google fits a monopoly under an economic system, again too many technical jargon and people will shrug their shoulders and go "I dunno, sounds like voodoo."