News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Judge Rules US v. Google Trial Documents Can Be Posted Online. Parent comment

Re:Judge Rules US v. Google Trial Documents Can Be Posted On... by Gh0stRAT on Wednesday September 27, 2023 @07:14PM (#37682785)
I think the difference is if Chrome had to stand on its own, it would be even more incentivized to drive traffic to Google for revenue at the expense of user experience.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Judge Rules US v. Google Trial Documents Can Be Posted On... by chii on Wednesday September 27, 2023 @07:30PM (#37682955)
what if, *gasp*, people paid for chrome directly?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Judge Rules US v. Google Trial Documents Can Be Posted On... by 20after4 on Wednesday September 27, 2023 @09:00PM (#37683819)
What if google paid it's users directly for their searches.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Judge Rules US v. Google Trial Documents Can Be Posted On... by Gh0stRAT on Wednesday September 27, 2023 @10:07PM (#37684321)
Sounds like a joke but Bing is actually trying this.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Judge Rules US v. Google Trial Documents Can Be Posted On... by dylan604 on Wednesday September 27, 2023 @11:46PM (#37684996)
if people paid for Chrome, Google would have to stop collecting data on its users. Google would much rather have that data than some <$20 fee. If Chrome was its own company, Google's money to be the default search engine would be more than they could earn from selling the browser. Free. Always has. Always will be. wait, that's the other data hoover.
[ Parent | on HN ]