New Google Trial Docs May Explain Why Search Sucks So Bad Now
gizmodo.com.au
The Department of Justice and Google just rumbled their way past the halfway point of a landmark antitrust trial vying to answer a potentially industry-rupturing question: Does Google maintain its ironfisted stranglehold over internet search results because of its superior innovation or as a byproduct of ruthless anti-competitive jockeying and closed-door dealings? New documents revealed […]

tl/dr: email chains used as evidence in DOJ Google antitrust case show internal arguments about drops in # of searches, and how to increase them so that people see more ads. Search team wants to create better search results to keep people coming back.

Advertising team wants to find any way to make people search for as long and as often as possible (“increasing the journey length”) even if it means delivering less relevant search results.

You can actually read many of the trial documents here -
https://www.justice.gov/atr/us-and-plaintiff-states-v-google-llc-2020-trial-exhibits

this file was particularly interesting. https://www.justice.gov/d9/2023-11/417557.pdf

  • @[email protected]English
    6•1 year ago

    I think the blood loss and infection risk may be a problem. I think they may have speculated about it in academia though, not sure what the outcome was.

    • @[email protected]English
      8•1 year ago

      Yeah, and if you’re that hungry that the meat would save your life, you’re in no state to recover from such a devastating wound. Your immune system and ability to generate new blood would be severely compromised.

      And then there’s the added mental toll of coping with the lost limb and having to learn to use it, whilst you’re already dizzy from hunger and blood loss, so any chances at other food would be much harder to exploit.

      I think objectively it would make your situation much worse.