It looks like the ex-DDG employee got the details wrong, and read the slides backwards.

  • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Would Google lie to their advertisers? Not in a way that Legal would consider lies, that’s their bread and butter they’re fucking with. They’re already in hot water because some websites figured out ways to get ad revenue marked as “100% seen by a human” playing in popunders and hidden players, which is probably why Google wants to expand their remote attestation bullshit.

    Google altering search queries is well known and documented, even for advertisers. The big claim was that Google was doing it to defraud their customers (not their users).

    Google’s WiFi sniffing wasn’t illegal as far as I know, at least according to the American FCC. I’m not sure what the deal is with Chromebooks (I think they’re about as intrusive as their Microsoft competition?) but you’re right about their destroying evidence being terrible. I’m sure they’ll get fined to hell and back once this commission is done.

    However, sensationalist lies will only work in Google’s favour, as it can use the slander of publications like these to demonstrate the heavy impact of the antitrust case which could in turn lower their actual fines.