Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

Google really should start floating some plans for splitting itself up. Things worked out pretty well when Ma Bell was split up. Some people thought it would all fail, but the companies have done a good job competing and cooperating at the right times.

If Google comes up with the plans, it's better than some antagonist.

Google seems harder to split up than Bell to me. Bell was split regionally which makes sense since each region has it's own wires and can make money separately. Google has the problem that all their products other than adds lose money (or make money through integration with Google adds)

This is exactly why it's important to bust them up: all those other products are effectively "dumping" on whatever sector they compete in. This even discourages time-investment (to develop) and learning-to-use investment (for users) for free alternatives, not just commercial ones.

All of their products helped the sector they are in. They didn't "dump" into it. Google continually improved areas where other companies previously refused to, even if they were charging for their services.

Mail. Internet browsers? Does it really need to be stated? Open source. Kubernetes. Open source. Tensor architecture. Freely released.

I don't see the argument for breaking Google up other than people are holding some vendetta against Google for being successful AND a pretty good citizen in the overall landscape so to speak.

If anyone needs to be broken up it's Microsoft. Microsoft actively harms every other competitor by bundling all their services together to the point where businesses won't even look at other software (teams? Azure is basically sold on nepotism).

I think you misunderstand what 'dumping' means in this market context. Sure, free software like Linux is great. But if you didn't have that preconceived notion, a competitor dumping free software on the market to make others' initiatives unprofitable would look like an anti-trust violation, rather than a charitable act of community.

I understand perfectly fine. I think your statement however is quite ignorant about the state of things at the time these actions were taken.

Do yourself a favor and research a little bit.