Europe is Wrong to Target Google  Taking a pop at the largest search engine of the world seems to be the hobby of the entire continent and it seems that even the European Parliament finds it difficult to resist. In a mostly symbolic and recent vote, it was urged by representatives that Google search should be separated from the other services offered by the company, which essentially means that the company should simply be broken up. While the detractors of the firm would definitely benefit from this move, the European citizens may not be so lucky. Similar to the social networking sector, which is dominated by Facebook, search also seems to be a natural monopoly. The results offered by Google becomes more relevant as it discovers more about who is requesting the query, why and where. Hence, it is natural that a company would do better if it has organized 90% of the world’s information as opposed to one that holds about one-tenth of that information. However, search is just one part of the sprawling and huge portfolio maintained by Google. Other information businesses include self-driving cars and smart thermostats. Both of these businesses are dependent on the company’s endless reservoirs of data, algorithms and the sensors that are embedded in hardware. The dilemma is still not understood by the policy makers. Separating Google search from the other services offered by the company would mean that they would become irrelevant and inaccurate. The problem is that allowing the search engine giant to operate in the way it does will give it power to invade other domains as well, something they want to avoid. A similar dilemma is presented by Facebook too. The identity gateway of this social network is extremely useful when people wish to build a service around their online personality such as sharing music or tools. Thus, Facebook has become the custodian of people’s consumption profiles and reputations as it maps their social connections and interests. Other businesses gain access to a business’s digital identity and Facebook learns more when people connect with the businesses. The question is that if the data of individuals is the key to solving problems related to health or the environment, who should accumulate it and whether it should be traded as a commodity. What people need is a data system that’s secure and decentralized so only authorized people should be able to gain access to information and it should be pooled into a common resource for every aspiring business. This means that Europe doesn’t need to target Google only. The only way to level the playing field for all companies is to consider some types of data as part of a common infrastructure, which is open to everyone. Basic search services don’t need to be provided by Google, but advanced search services can be for a fee. In this way, Google could be prevented from hoarding the data for the purpose of advertising. America, on the other hand, will not give up on this model as its surveillance state needs the data Europe is Wrong to Target Google Taking a pop at the largest search engine of the world seems to be the hobby of the entire continent and it seems that even the European Parliament finds it difficult to resist. In a mostly symbolic and recent vote, it was urged by representatives that Google search should be separated from the other services offered by the company, which essentially means that the company should simply be broken up. While the detractors of the firm would definitely benefit from this move, the European citizens may not be so lucky. Similar to the social networking sector, which is dominated by Facebook, search also seems to be a natural monopoly. The results offered by Google becomes more relevant as it discovers more about who is requesting the query, why and where. Hence, it is natural that a company would do better if it has organized 90% of the world’s information as opposed to one that holds about one-tenth of that information. However, search is just one part of the sprawling and huge portfolio maintained by Google. Other information businesses include self-driving cars and smart thermostats. Both of these businesses are dependent on the company’s endless reservoirs of data, algorithms and the sensors that are embedded in hardware. The dilemma is still not understood by the policy makers. Separating Google search from the other services offered by the company would mean that they would become irrelevant and inaccurate. The problem is that allowing the search engine giant to operate in the way it does will give it power to invade other domains as well, something they want to avoid. A similar dilemma is presented by Facebook too. The identity gateway of this social network is extremely useful when people wish to build a service around their online personality such as sharing music or tools. Thus, Facebook has become the custodian of people’s consumption profiles and reputations as it maps their social connections and interests. Other businesses gain access to a business’s digital identity and Facebook learns more when people connect with the businesses. The question is that if the data of individuals is the key to solving problems related to health or the environment, who should accumulate it and whether it should be traded as a commodity. What people need is a data system that’s secure and decentralized so only authorized people should be able to gain access to information and it should be pooled into a common resource for every aspiring business. This means that Europe doesn’t need to target Google only. The only way to level the playing field for all companies is to consider some types of data as part of a common infrastructure, which is open to everyone. Basic search services don’t need to be provided by Google, but advanced search services can be for a fee. In this way, Google could be prevented from hoarding the data for the purpose of advertising. America, on the other hand, will not give up on this model as its surveillance state needs the data

comments