7 ms·

This is such a big story and yet most of HN just doesn't care. It should make the WSJ though.

by davidu 2y ago

charlie0 2y ago
Yes, this is a big deal, but most of us have simply stopped using Google and moved on to other tools.
- happyopossum 2y ago
  > most of us have simply stopped using Google Citation needed
  - magic-michael 2y ago
    Google has lost a small amount of market share, but nothing too significant to warrant "most of us have simply stopped using Google": https://searchengineland.com/googles-huge-search-market-share-loss-wasnt-real-data-revised-440191#:~:text=While%20it%20wasn't%20as,market%20share%20since%20August%202023.&text=Statcounter%20has%20revised%20data%20indicating,and%20Yahoo%20made%20ludicrous%20gains https://searchengineland.com/googles-huge-search-market-shar....
crote 2y ago
It isn't exactly news, though. This isn't a Forbes issue, or a Google issue. Pretty much every single large company is actively being ruined by parasites. We're dealing with a generation of CEOs / CFOs who were taught to care about nothing except short-term shareholder value. Quality and reputation doesn't matter anymore, so you replace your products with cheap garbage and hope nobody notices. When that inevitably fails, every single part of the company including its name is being torn apart and sold piece by piece, until nothing is left but an empty shell with a lot of debt. We're intentionally ruining our economies and praising the people doing it. If the "Western" world gets economically steamrolled by Asia in the next couple of decades, we've got nobody to blame for it but ourselves.
- akira2501 2y ago
  > It isn't exactly news, though. It's exactly news. It spots the issue, dives into it, exposes the source of it, and details the structure of how it came into existence. That's what news is. That you're not surprised by it is not material. > we've got nobody to blame for it but ourselves. Ironically you are the one who characterized this article as "not news."
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  >We're dealing with a generation of CEOs / CFOs who were taught to care about nothing except short-term shareholder value. Quality and reputation doesn't matter anymore, so you replace your products with cheap garbage and hope nobody notices. There is a line where you really do need to compromise on quality and even reputation to keep costs down, though. If you can't or refuse to do that, you end up stagnant and irrelevant like Japan. Customers ultimately don't care how much sincerity and effort was infused into a product as long as it's past a certain "good enough" threshold.
  - ghaff 2y ago
    Yes, there's a lot of crap out there but I also don't want to pay a huge premium for everything so that it lasts a lifetime (and will probably be outdated or out of fashion long before that).
  - crote 2y ago
    I agree, but the economy as a whole seems to have swung to the completely opposite side. Every product is either turning into disposable one-time-use items, or into a subscription. Even "luxury" items aren't providing quality anymore. I'm not calling for t-shirts that are guaranteed to last 20 years, but it would be nice if clothing didn't fall apart after a wash or two just because they saved 5% on material cost.
  - qnleigh 2y ago
    > Customers ultimately don't care how much sincerity and effort was infused into a product as long as it's past a certain "good enough" threshold. This is not universally true. For one thing, it has changed over time as expectations shift. Presumably our expectations have been forced downward by the diminishing quality and increasing costs of consumer goods. There is also cultural variation, with Japan as an example.
heisenbit 2y ago
It is a big story if one can make it part of the anti-trust actions. Google having a monopoly which it leaves laying around as a weapon to be picked up by the next most corrupted big player to damage real businesses. The impact on the market is measurable (with naked eye), is distorting the market (which anti-trust is dealing with) and is an instance of escalating (making it actionable) domain reputation abuse. Google failing to police such blatant abuse might also open them to class action lawsuits.

This is such a big story and yet most of HN just doesn't care. It should make the WSJ though.

by davidu 2y ago

This is such a big story and yet most of HN just doesn't care. It should make the WSJ though.

charlie0 2y ago

Yes, this is a big deal, but most of us have simply stopped using Google and moved on to other tools.

happyopossum 2y ago
> most of us have simply stopped using Google Citation needed
- magic-michael 2y ago
  Google has lost a small amount of market share, but nothing too significant to warrant "most of us have simply stopped using Google": https://searchengineland.com/googles-huge-search-market-share-loss-wasnt-real-data-revised-440191#:~:text=While%20it%20wasn't%20as,market%20share%20since%20August%202023.&text=Statcounter%20has%20revised%20data%20indicating,and%20Yahoo%20made%20ludicrous%20gains https://searchengineland.com/googles-huge-search-market-shar....

crote 2y ago

It isn't exactly news, though. This isn't a Forbes issue, or a Google issue. Pretty much every single large company is actively being ruined by parasites. We're dealing with a generation of CEOs / CFOs who were taught to care about nothing except short-term shareholder value. Quality and reputation doesn't matter anymore, so you replace your products with cheap garbage and hope nobody notices. When that inevitably fails, every single part of the company including its name is being torn apart and sold piece by piece, until nothing is left but an empty shell with a lot of debt. We're intentionally ruining our economies and praising the people doing it. If the "Western" world gets economically steamrolled by Asia in the next couple of decades, we've got nobody to blame for it but ourselves.

akira2501 2y ago
> It isn't exactly news, though. It's exactly news. It spots the issue, dives into it, exposes the source of it, and details the structure of how it came into existence. That's what news is. That you're not surprised by it is not material. > we've got nobody to blame for it but ourselves. Ironically you are the one who characterized this article as "not news."
Dalewyn 2y ago
>We're dealing with a generation of CEOs / CFOs who were taught to care about nothing except short-term shareholder value. Quality and reputation doesn't matter anymore, so you replace your products with cheap garbage and hope nobody notices. There is a line where you really do need to compromise on quality and even reputation to keep costs down, though. If you can't or refuse to do that, you end up stagnant and irrelevant like Japan. Customers ultimately don't care how much sincerity and effort was infused into a product as long as it's past a certain "good enough" threshold.
- ghaff 2y ago
  Yes, there's a lot of crap out there but I also don't want to pay a huge premium for everything so that it lasts a lifetime (and will probably be outdated or out of fashion long before that).
- crote 2y ago
  I agree, but the economy as a whole seems to have swung to the completely opposite side. Every product is either turning into disposable one-time-use items, or into a subscription. Even "luxury" items aren't providing quality anymore. I'm not calling for t-shirts that are guaranteed to last 20 years, but it would be nice if clothing didn't fall apart after a wash or two just because they saved 5% on material cost.
- qnleigh 2y ago
  > Customers ultimately don't care how much sincerity and effort was infused into a product as long as it's past a certain "good enough" threshold. This is not universally true. For one thing, it has changed over time as expectations shift. Presumably our expectations have been forced downward by the diminishing quality and increasing costs of consumer goods. There is also cultural variation, with Japan as an example.

heisenbit 2y ago

It is a big story if one can make it part of the anti-trust actions. Google having a monopoly which it leaves laying around as a weapon to be picked up by the next most corrupted big player to damage real businesses. The impact on the market is measurable (with naked eye), is distorting the market (which anti-trust is dealing with) and is an instance of escalating (making it actionable) domain reputation abuse. Google failing to police such blatant abuse might also open them to class action lawsuits.