zlacker

>>topshe+(OP)
If this isn't the straw that breaks the camel's back, there is never going to be one.

Google needs to be broken up.

They own the browser market. They own the web (through Adwords). They own Search. They own mobile. They own most of the video sharing market with 2.5 billion monthly annual users. They own a good chunk of email with 1.2 billion monthly annual users.

They have amassed an incomprehensible amount of power and influence over humanity and they have proven repeatedly that they are willing to use that power to the detriment of humanity and to entrench themselves further.

Google needs to be broken up.

>>mozbal+O4
Google broke itself up in 2015. What are you even asking for here?

Chrome and Android are open source, and there are several forks of both thriving in the ecosystem. Yeah it would be cool if there was a decent open source alternative to GMail and Drive, but no one else seems to have figured out how to get the incentives right for something like that.

>>px43+z6
That "incentive" for Google is "80% of our revenue comes from ads".

Google's open source projects are open in name only.

>>troupo+V6
> Google's open source projects are open in name only.

The link at the top of the page is pointing to the GitHub repo, where you can see literally over a million contributions from thousands of people working at hundreds of companies: https://github.com/chromium/chromium/commits/main

I've worked on both Chrome and Android (Chromium and AOSP) professionally, and never worked at Google.

>>px43+N8
There is the OSS vs FOSS distinction which may have been unwittingly invoked. Certainly there is nothing “free” about Chromium except its price. Google is not about to switch to a fork for Chrome and any changes to Chromium which are not approved by Google are unlikely to be in any release builds.