Aurélien Mähl 🇪🇺
apmaehl.bsky.social
Aurélien Mähl 🇪🇺
@apmaehl.bsky.social
330 followers 1K following 160 posts
Policy @ DuckDuckGo. Follow for Tintin memes and tech/competition policy (or both). Brussels | Berlin
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Welcomed explainer from @signal.org's president about last week's serious AWS-related incident. The concentration of infrastructure / resources among "hyperscalers" she points to is reminiscent to what exists with web search infrastructure.
📣THREAD: It’s surprising to me that so many people were surprised to learn that Signal runs partly on AWS (something we can do because we use encryption to make sure no one but you–not AWS, not Signal, not anyone–can access your comms).

It’s also concerning. 1/
PSA: we're aware that Signal is down for some people. This appears to be related to a major AWS outage. Stand by.
...curbing exclusivity, GenAI alone as market force is unlikely to break Google’s search dominance.

More by Mihir Kshirsagar ⬆️
Just like Google managed to cement dominance on browser and then mobile, its control over distribution points & data advantage is set to reproduce the same w/ AI.

It's a call for meaningful policy interventions, but also a call for the plurality of competitors to expand & deepen their partnerships
🆕✍️ Is consumer AI heading for a duopoly? gabrielweinberg.com/p/consumer-a...
Reposted by Aurélien Mähl 🇪🇺
my latest for @techpolicypress.bsky.social on the US v. Google search antitrust case and just how badly the court missed the opportunity to contend with Google’s power in the genAI market. genAI won’t magically unseat Google’s market dominance, as the court suggests, it will only deepen it
The Google search antitrust remedies trial decision fails to seriously contend with the tremendous advantages the company holds in the generative AI market due to its search monopoly says Kate Brennan, associate director at the AI Now Institute.
Decision in US vs. Google Gets it Wrong on Generative AI | TechPolicy.Press
Google will continue to enjoy the fruits of its search monopoly to secure its success in the generative AI market, writes Kate Brennan.
www.techpolicy.press
...Judge Mehta’s willingness to reopen and review the default payment issues will become critical."
Recommended read by @alissacooper.bsky.social: www.techpolicy.press/without-a-pa...

"If concerns raised about the inadequacy of the [data sharing] remedy are demonstrated through the failure of competition to take hold, the manner and timeliness for...
www.techpolicy.press
I posted a couple times about how DuckDuckGo uniquely integrates AI answers to the search experience. But you better actually hear directly from Tim, one of those making the magic internally.

"Search Assist is "unique in that way across the AI answers industry, in that it...
"All the privacy debates surrounding Google search results from the past two decades apply one-for-one to AI chats, but to an even greater degree. That’s why we started offering Duck.ai for protected chatbot conversations and optional, anonymous AI-assisted answers in our private search engine."
Reposted by Aurélien Mähl 🇪🇺
"Google's abusive behaviour...had a negative impact on all European citizens in their day-to-day use of the web"
Reposted by Aurélien Mähl 🇪🇺
The impact of those has been negligible (less than 1% change in Google’s market share) because the OEMs’ total dependence on Android to operate in the market rendered the contractual changes impotent. That dependence is as strong in the US as it is in the EU, so we can expect the same result.
Reposted by Aurélien Mähl 🇪🇺
At KGI we think a lot about concrete evidence. Seven years ago, the European Commission instituted contractual prohibitions in its Google Android case that were of a similar nature to those included by the court here.
Reposted by Aurélien Mähl 🇪🇺
After issuing a liability decision that relied extensively on claims about both the power of defaults and the size of Google’s revenue share payments, the court’s opinion does nothing to prevent Google from continuing to pay distributors for defaults.
The recently published UK's CMA provisional decision to regulate Google search is making that point eloquently: AI *is* impacting usages, but the underlying competitive dynamics remain. Google's key platform & data assets are more critical than ever in the AI era.
I get that AI has changed search competition and the Google antitrust case.

I also remember when the government didn't sue Google over antitrust in 2012/2013, it was partly based on the belief that mobile would jolt competition and blunt Google's power.

That belief was 100% wrong.
Reposted by Aurélien Mähl 🇪🇺
J'ai signé la pétition pour appeler le gouvernement français (quand on en aura un) à mettre en œuvre l’initiative "Skyshield".

C'est ici: shorturl.at/42Rr5

Il y a bien sûr l'aspect humanitaire. Mais il en va aussi de la défense des intérêts européens. 1/
There's a cognitive dissonance between the finding of monopolization and what the same judge says should be done against it.

On the data sharing side, some remedies were approved but with lots of caveats. Hard to see how they will be of any practical use.
DOJ: Google paid distributors for default placement, this entrenched the monopoly.
Judge (verdict): Yes, this was illegal conduct.
DOJ: So as a remedy, you must end the paying of distributors for default placement
Judge (remedy): "Google will be permitted to pay distributors for default placement."
...hold back competitors, including in AI search. As a result, consumers will continue to suffer. We believe Congress should now step in to swiftly make Google do the thing it fears the most: compete on a level playing field."
Here's what our CEO Gabriel Weinberg had to say about yesterday's US judgment:

"We do not believe the remedies ordered by the court will force the changes necessary to adequately address Google’s illegal behavior. Google will still be allowed to continue to use its monopoly to...
The Commission is giving antitrust law / DMA offenders a license to trespass the rules, with these sort of moves. What message does it send to those many businesses - European and foreign - investing and employing in Europe and being harmed by these abuses?
EU was scheduled to release a fine against Google. It was pulled at the last minute due to EU-US trade tensions.

Great scoop from MLex.
Swallowing a decrease of tariffs on industrial goods while the EU's get hiked up is already tough enough (and might not even pass the EP). So the EC has little choice but to react the way Ribera does. But it might inhibit the actual investigations, and that's maybe the effect that's wanted.