I have chosen my words very carefully exactly because I did not want to say that government action against Google is not merited for any reason.

But calling for government action just because people can't be bothered to use a different search engine that is just a click away discredits all valid criticism of Google's dominant market position.

> And in this world Google has an actual monopoly that won’t be broken without government intervention.

On what? I genuinely don't see what people think google has a "monopoly" on. It's definitely the biggest player in search and ads, but it's nowhere near the only company. I wouldn't even call them "overly dominant"

Google, not "overtly dominant" in its Search, Maps and YouTube services?!? (Also Android, going by market share rather than worth.)

YouTube might be the closest for user generated streaming and video hosting, but Twitch and Vimeo still exist and are happily chugging along. Maps and Search, not really. I'm perfectly happy to use DDG for both, and I'm not made to suffer for it.

As a litmus test I might say that "overly dominant" means that a slightly-above-average member of the audience couldn't name another option, and I don't really think any of these would hold up.

> Also Android, going by market share rather than worth.

Android vs iOS are actually surprisingly close, with iOS winning in the US <https://deviceatlas.com/blog/android-v-ios-market-share#us> (admittedly this is measured through UA sniffing and fingerprinting on websites, but I think the point stands)

> Maps and Search, not really.

If you go with that, OpenStreetMap/iOS Maps and Bing "still exist and are happily chugging along" too ?

In the US maybe, but worldwide Android has 87% market share !

As a reminder, "monopoly" is the ability of being able to dictate your terms to the market - when a company (or cartel) has such a power, the market isn't free anymore.

They are just as dominant as they provide good service. there are alternatives, nobody is forcing people to use Google

Sure but there is a huge space for government intervention -- it could encourage the competition and level the playing field instead. Doctorow (for example) argues a better approach is to require things like open standards and interoperability.

Monopoly on what? Search, or ads?

And people downvote you, which is silly. What, exactly, does google have a monopoly on? People use their products because they are good, not because they have to. Anybody could cone along with better mail, maps, or search and people would have little trouble switching (okay mail might be tricky).