• ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Oh dear… I guess Sundar’s $1m brownlicking wasn’t quite enough for Cheeto.

    Zuckerberg too paid his $1m due to the Orange Utan and that wasn’t enough to keep him out of trouble.

    I guess the tech bros are getting their leopard-face-eating moment too like the rest of the cretinous MAGA voters…

    • 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Until these companies actually start breaking up, anything can change. Appeals, bribing, lobbying and Orange Cheeto isn’t someone who follows the laws or the judge’s ruling.

  • FauxPseudo @lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    If only someone had said something back in 2007 when Google was trying to buy Doubleclick. It’s a shame not one person had the foresight to anticipate this.

  • will_a113@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    So if there is actually some punishment handed down, any bets on what even more hellish scenario will rise up to replace the one where Google controls internet ads?

    • ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      I don’t give flying fuck who controls internet ads. This does nothing to solve the problem of why internet ads that create a demand for ubiquitous surveillance and privacy invasion are allowed at all.

      I’m glad that Google is being sued and I’ll celebrate when they lose in court. But they’re being sued for the wrong reasons. The problem isn’t who hogs the ads market, it’s why there is an ads market in the first place. This court case has no benefits for us the internet users: it’s another rich man’s power play and respect for the users doesn’t enter into consideration whatsoever here.