• errer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      2 days ago

      This tells you all you need to know about how “punitive” this ruling was

      • BetaDoggo_@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        To be fair anything short of selling chrome or breaking up the company would have a positive reaction. The possibility of losing chrome was priced in.

    • Pumpkin Escobar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      2 days ago

      I liked googles response statement that they disagree with the ruling and are considering their next steps. You could hear the champagne bottles popping open in the background… and it was a written statement.

  • wosat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 days ago

    I never thought forcing Google to sell Chrome was a good idea. Most of the companies lining up to buy it were AI companies flushed with private equity money. Does anyone really think those companies would do a better job at protecting user privacy and avoiding monopolistic practices?

    • BlackEco@lemmy.blackeco.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 days ago

      While I agree with you, I wished that Mehta would entertain the idea of spinning Chrome into an independent company, even though it is still unclear to me how a browser company can generate revenue, especially to pay the salaries of the army of engineers working on Blink.