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

      • oce 🐆
        link
        fedilink
        English
        192 years ago

        Legal getting in the way of engineering is usually a very good thing.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          132 years ago

          software engineer in a medium-large public tech company, i agree. i can’t even imagine the amount of stress the legal team must be under to constantly be discovering what management and engineering have messed up this time…and discover the problem is 6 months old and if a regulator catches wind of it it’ll be painful.

          • oce 🐆
            link
            fedilink
            English
            102 years ago

            I was actually thinking about the goal of those laws, protecting society from unbridled capitalist tech companies. The fear of regulators is only an intermediate tool.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              22 years ago

              i personally see them as different tools of the same end goal - wealth generation in a checked and sustainable manner. capitalist environments inspire innovation, but require boundaries set (regulators) and a political environment which is alert and aware of exploitation and can make the calls about what is or is not acceptable.