| ▲ | TazeTSchnitzel 3 hours ago |
| This comes off as comically evil. Disabling the AI summaries in search results is trivial, so them refusing to do so and blocking search entirely feels like a blatant attempt at coercion. Isn't it an abuse of monopoly power? |
|
| ▲ | raegis an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| I'm sure they will rethink this when Trump's term ends. |
|
| ▲ | nsoam 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| That would make sense if the AI summaries from Search were a different product. |
| |
| ▲ | jdiff 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | These summaries have been trivially bolted on, they're entirely self-contained, they can be easily turned off. | | |
| ▲ | brainwad an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Possibly they want to evolve the feature to be _not_ bolted on. | |
| ▲ | Hamuko 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | And sometimes they just fail to generate, while the search still shows the usual results. | |
| ▲ | nsoam 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Some results also have thumbnails. They could easily be turned off. That doesn’t mean thumbnails are a different product, or an abuse of monopoly power. | | |
| ▲ | Brian_K_White an hour ago | parent [-] | | It does if the thumbnails are harmful and you're as market dominant as Google with the incalculable levers of coersion like turning off your email or drive which they spend 20 years actively doing everything possible to get everyone to use. | | |
| ▲ | nsoam an hour ago | parent [-] | | Whether the AI summaries are harmful to users of Search has no bearing on whether the AI summaries are an abuse of monopoly power. | | |
|
|
|
|
