Oh shit.... I never realized until now that's exactly what the point of Alexa is. I thought the point was like a different UI to Amazon. As in "being able to buy by clicking OR sounding must lead to a strictly larger number of sales than being able to buy by clicking only". So you can imagine my confusion on people telling me that Alexa isn't a good UI.
Of course. The point is to snoop on people to make better "recommendations". Dystopian.
It can be both. Saying "Alexa, buy eggs" is a lot quicker and easier than loading up Amazon, finding the eggs you like which will probably be the top result for you, and clicking buy (or even Buy Now). Instead, it already knows your preferences in eggs anyway, so just by telling it, you can impulsively buy the eggs without even stopping what you're doing.
Then they get all that juicy "accidental activation" data on top of that.
Why not? Amazon owns Whole Foods, and Amazon Fresh has existed for almost 20 years now.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07GBM7TZJ seems like a totally normal price to pay for eggs these days, although you probably wouldn't just buy a dozen eggs in isolation, given delivery fees and driver tip.
I don't think so, but I needed something as an example and it was the first thing that came to mind. Also the idea of someone impulse buying eggs is amusing to me.
> Why not just use a blog site, medium or substack?
Because it looks more credible, obviously. In a sense it's cargo cult science: people observe this is the style of science, and so copy just the style; to a casual observer it appears to be science.
Professional science has been doing that a long time if one considers that many published works were never independently tested and replicated. If it's a scientist, and uses scientific descriptions, many just repeat it from there.
Publication in a journal is not a requirement for the scientific method. If anything, the insistence that something not published in a scientific journal is not science is, itself, cargo cult scientism.
Maybe some reverse attribution to determine how much credit to give different sources in the old top k results. Maybe a llm that is trained on fact finding, and giving proper % of credit. But this would probably require a collective contract in place to benefit site owners, which means its never going to happen.
You don’t think it can run one more iteration on its own output to provide attribution? They could even create a synthetic page view for the sources with an exclusive bot and not change anything about how things are done (the bot is told to visit the site registering a page view).
Maybe off topic, but Ive always found strange people who comment on Google's monopoly by focusing on chrome. It seems obvious to me that the key to their dominance is that they both have control over how traffic is distributed to websites, and how those websites get paid for the traffic they get. Chrome and android are just nice to haves, but Google would still be a monopoly without them.
I think if you wanna break up Google it would be a lot more effective to separate search from AdSense, rather than chrome.
Also Chrome is basically useless as a money-making product without the google integrations. There's no way to monetize it without search and ad integrations.
50million chromeOS new devices are sold and added to its userbase. Chrome as a company could be huge and compete against Windows, Mac, iOS and Android.
Google sells chrome(os) directly as a product to enterprises and schools for fleet management and addon functions. Its currently part of google workspace but could be separated out.
Is going to print money like google ads? Probably not. Could it sustain the browser as a standalone business? Perhaps.
Google's anticompetitive conduct occurred mainly through agreements concerning web browser defaults.
Controlling default settings in web browsers via these agreements will be prohibited. It stands to reason that controlling default settings by distributing its own web browser will, too.
"Maybe off topic, but Ive always found strange people who comment on Google's monopoly by focusing on chrome."
As such, it is not strange that proposed remedies targeting Chrome were submitted and have been a focus of online commentary.
So does x, so does youtube, so does tiktok, so does instagram. It's not unique for an app to control both discovery and monetization of content within it.
Hmm ok. What she's arguing for is "fake it till you make it". Think about it, the first thing this person did when she started steering, was write a book about startups even though by her own admission she didn't know anything about startups.
I liked the rails/steering advise, disliked the fake it till you make it advice.
I was referring to the "in defiance of court order", and I was being sarcastic. Sorry, thought it would be obvious. Yes, they have a history of doing that.
Good point. I'd be curious if anyone actually has the text showing he said this. It's in principia I guess. My bet was that he never gave a full description, but rather just said that it is moon/sun that *causes* the tides.-- I'd wager he acknowledged the incompleteness of it.
Which would still be mostly accurate. It's hard to imagine him knowing about the complicated tides in England and saying definitively he had a full model of the tides.
