The article analyzes the recent U.S. Justice Department's case against Google for monopolistic practices in its search and advertising platform. It reflects on the irony of competitors, once confident in their market strategies, now appealing for regulatory intervention due to perceived inequities in effectiveness and efficiency metrics. The author questions the motivations behind this shift, suggesting that the marketplace has evolved since the lawsuit was filed in 2023, making the case feel outdated. This raises broader questions about consumer influence in shaping market dynamics and competition.
It's interesting to watch when competitors who don't get the winning results they are persuaded they so richly deserve turn their traditional form of appreciation for winning at all costs into approbation at the superior performance of others.
Has the Objectivist hero we know from Ayn Rand become a tender, help-me-I'm-melting snowflake?
The case is ancient in internet years and tragically backward-looking. Since the time that the government brought this case in 2023, the world has indeed changed.
In a business like digital where so many of its leaders are so convinced that the only means of judgement is effectiveness and efficiency.
Collection
[
|
...
]