GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Does the USA hate success? Why punish the Winners? (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1013918)

$5 submissions 03-12-2011 04:10 PM
Does the USA hate success? Why punish the Winners?
 
Google takes links that alta vista all but ignored and finally delivered on the promise of search engine technology. Google takes GO TO ad technology (and pays for it later :winkwink:) and builds it into a multibillion business.

Why punish success? Aren't the hundreds of thousands of jobs (both at Google and companies capitalizing on Google's search engine traffic) enough of a societal benefit? Does cornering ANY market necessarily mean unfair practices? :helpme

For all of this, it gets poked in the ass by the US Senate. Source:http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51079.html

Quote:
In recent years, the dominance over Internet search of the world?s largest search engine, Google, has increased and Google has increasingly sought to acquire e-commerce sites in myriad businesses," Kohl said in a news release.

"In this regard, we will closely examine allegations raised by e-commerce websites that compete with Google that they are being treated unfairly in search ranking, and in their ability to purchase search advertising,? Kohl continued. ?We also will continue to closely examine the impact of further acquisitions in this sector."
Is this a case of "Don't hate the player, hate the game?"

brassmonkey 03-12-2011 04:23 PM
google = USA? wtf are you talking about?

$5 submissions 03-12-2011 04:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by brassmonkey (Post 17975348)
google = USA? wtf are you talking about?
http://i53.tinypic.com/sgq3ol.jpg

Reading is Fundamental. USA = US senate = regulatory infrastructure. Success = Google and other dominant market players.

brassmonkey 03-12-2011 04:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by $5 submissions (Post 17975354)
http://i53.tinypic.com/sgq3ol.jpg

Reading is Fundamental. USA = US senate = regulatory infrastructure. Success = Google and other dominant market players.
turn your clock back. google is a company. are you huffin paint? :helpme

DaddyHalbucks 03-12-2011 04:40 PM
Winning is great, but when any company is an uber winner that creates a monopoly, and abuses that monopoly, then there are legal problems.

$5 submissions 03-12-2011 04:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by brassmonkey (Post 17975366)
turn your clock back. google is a company. are you huffin paint? :helpme
US Senators too eager to swing on Google's jock. Why? Because they just happen to be a market dominant market? Assuming this was achieved naturally through fair play, why punish success. US Senators supposedly represent the USA. Hence the title.

Mutt 03-12-2011 04:56 PM
anti-trust law has been around 100 years, and yes it does punish companies that dominate an industry for the greater good that competition should produce. it's the price of that type of overwhelming success.

Manwin is on its way to the same status in porn - unfortunately they did it by stealing from everybody else.

brassmonkey 03-12-2011 04:58 PM
well google is sucking up sales. don't hate the playa hate the game.

$5 submissions 03-12-2011 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutt (Post 17975397)
anti-trust law has been around 100 years, and yes it does punish companies that dominate an industry for the greater good that competition should produce. it's the price of that type of overwhelming success.

Manwin is on its way to the same status in porn - unfortunately they did it by stealing from everybody else.
Nice contrast of two differing companies. But shouldn't winning in a FAIR WAY be protected? It's not like Google resorted to "bundling" and other "network dominance" shenanigans that Microsoft pulled in order to corner the market.

woj 03-12-2011 05:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by $5 submissions (Post 17975406)
Nice contrast of two differing companies. But shouldn't winning in a FAIR WAY be protected? It's not like Google resorted to "bundling" and other "network dominance" shenanigans that Microsoft pulled in order to corner the market.
what's considered "fair way" isn't that clear... microsoft bundling a browser with an operating system, isn't really any less fair than google releasing chrome browser for free.... or releasing gmail with 2G limit for free, when everyone else had 10MB limit at the time... etc
those actions by some observers could be very easily considered "unfair competition"...

blackmonsters 03-12-2011 06:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by $5 submissions (Post 17975373)
US Senators too eager to swing on Google's jock. Why? Because they just happen to be a market dominant market? Assuming this was achieved naturally through fair play, why punish success. US Senators supposedly represent the USA. Hence the title.
Acquiring a massive traffic base from a site that built it's traffic through copyright
infringement (youtube) and never facing the punishment of the copyright law
is not exactly fair play in my mind.

I'm damn sure I'd get slammed hard if I tried to do that now.

Rochard 03-12-2011 06:29 PM
They aren't punishing Charlie Sheen, and he's still winning.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123