Judge in US v. Google trial didn’t know if Firefox is a browser or search engine::Google accused DOJ of aiming to force people to use “inferior” search products.
The judge in question is 51 years old. He’s not old enough to be this clueless about basics like the difference between a search engine and a web browser and popular examples of each.
I teach a programming class to young adults (18-25, usually) and was flabbergasted last semester when I realized that a couple of them didn’t know what a directory hierarchy/file system was.
My suspicion is that the ease of use angle of “just tell me what you want and I’ll find it” led to this. Not saying ease of use is bad, but I expected more from people wanting to learn programming.
And I’m over here meticulously organizing my music library into folders by band, album, year, etc…o the humanity.
There’s a subgroup of the millennial and gen X that grew up with a sweet spot of computers such that you actually need to know how it works in order to use one effectively. Ease enough to do a lot of fun stuff, hard enough that it encourages learning the technical minutiae. The rise of smart phones and net/chrome books means there is a huge chunk of population that has a superficial and passing relationship with tech. It’s big buttons or else it doesn’t register with them. It’s not their fault, the pursue of usability and fool proofing without actually giving tools to dig deep when necessary means they have less exposure to the underlying tech. Thus are less familiar with how things work. It’s an universal phenomenon, I would bet most people have no clue how to raise, grow and process food, but still we don’t starve, we go to the grocery and buy what’s there already cleaned, processed and packaged. There are huge advantages to understanding the chain of production of food, but I’d guess most people would struggle in an agronomy class about what’s a compost bin.
100% agree. Great description that dives into particulars of what I hand waved at.
Imo it’s because most of them used crap-ass Chromebooks in school since the US school system is underfunded and allowed Uncle Googs to foot the bill and teach an entire generation the shitty Chrome “OS” is how computers work.
No. It’s phones. Phones hide their file directories.
iPhones do, I can get to them on android
deleted by creator
What phone? I have a feeling your vendor is obfuscating it as stock android has a very straightforward files app.
The fact that android can be that different between different vendors isn’t help either.
You can get to them, but how many people actually do, or even realize the directory tree exists?
How do people usually clean up their storage space? I guess if they never run out, they could avoid using it. Another thing I use it for is looking though downloads. Maybe some people just download a new version every time?
Most people’s main use of storage is music, photos, and videos. All those can be managed from within their respective apps.
iOS has had a files app that looks very similar to the one on android for at least 5 years. Android had it first, but iPhones do not hide this app. It is installed by default just like on android.
iOS has had a files app that looks very similar to the one on android for at least 5 years. Android had it first, but iPhones do not hide this app. It is installed by default just like on android.
I know this thread is old as dirt, but I just have to respond.
While phones are computers, I feel like they’ve always been computers focused on consuming only. People use it to consume videos, social networks, games, music, you get the idea. Actual desktop and laptop computers have always been more focused on doing lots of different things. So consumption is definitely part of it, but also video editing, programming, scientific work, complex math, engineering, etc etc. Real heavy work type stuff.
I guess, to me, when schools started using Chromebooks, it sort of taught kids that actual laptops are just another device for consumption. Sure they can do work online through Goog Docs or whatever, but all that other really crunchy stuff is impossible since the “OS” is really just a web browser.
I’m obviously painting with a broad brush. Some phone users are total hackers, plenty of computer users only consume on their powerful computers, Chrome “OS” does have some (extremely limited) functionality, and tablets probably blur the line to some extent, but I think the broader idea holds.
Anyways, I’ve been thinking about your comment for a couple days, because it’s a valid point, and I really felt the need to address for some reason. Thanks for attending my Ted Talk.
As one of those people who didn’t understand what file systems and directories were at 18, it isn’t taught in early school so you don’t notice it is a thing that exists until you stumble upon it yourself. I distinctly remember the day it clicked and it felt like I had had an epiphany.
Once you break that basic barrier then you rely on your interests to take you further. I went from not understanding that to being a Linux guru in years time, so I fully believe if the desire to learn is there, it will happen. It is just not mandatory to learn anymore. So most people don’t.
School computer classes are often just job training for working in an office doing word processing shit.
Still, it goes a long way when you explain how these things work. It isn’t something super hard to grasp either, you just need to know that it exists in the first place. To know that it isn’t just technomagic and has a proper rhyme and reason for the way things work. I have seen far too many people use their documents folder as their everything folder scattered without a care.
At least their documents folder isn’t their desktop folder.
This is a fan-fucking-tastic article! Thanks bud.
And I’m over here meticulously organizing my music library into folders by band, album, year, etc…o the humanity.
beets, it’s a life changer
A music folder is like a zen garden. Where’s the zen in automating it all?
Kids often don’t know the difference between “wifi” and the Internet. It’s not an age thing these days.
Since smartphone became a thing it has always been my theory that millenials, and up to a point GenX, would be the only two generations to be forced into being tech-savy. Boomers and GenZ have been overwhelmingly tablet and phone users. Whoever still logging on a PC nowadays will have a vastly different experience than what it used to be.
It is a different world really. I am a huge geek and I have been in tech for a long time now, but I still get confused look at family gathering when I tell them I have no idea how to fix someone’s Ipad or what app/settings/touch gesture to do whatever.
Kids often aren’t explained the difference and if they have been they just don’t understand, wifi IS the internet to them.
A 51 year old Judge has a vastly different brain and should be able to retain the difference when explained.
You’d think they’d notice they can use the internet from their phones when there’s no wifi.
If it’s not connected to a cord, it’s wifi. Now try and explaining those nuances to them that there’s more than one-type of wireless signal.
Wifi is easier and simpler. Sometime I find myself making the mistake…
In construction there’s a similar issue (with grown men even). A circular saw is the tool, but everyone calls it a skilsaw, which is a brand name. You can correct them, they just don’t care, that’s what the tool is called, a skilsaw.
I hold out hope they’ll figure out the difference when they have to pay for separate subscriptions for cellular data and home internet service.
Some places have mobile (cellular and internet) and home internet, so that’s not likely to help some people.
TIL skilsaw was a brand name. I thought it just just the guy making Doom maps.
Pretty sure they call cellular data “wifi”.
deleted by creator
Lawmakers and judges should not be allowed to make decisions on something they know nothing about. This is a huge problem with people not even wanting to educate themselves, and then deciding how the rest of us get to interact with the internet.
That being said, Firefox is only popular with tech folk. They have just over a 3% market share. I’m a developer and I don’t know anyone but myself that uses it. My mother would think I was talking about a cartoon if I brought it up. A lot of lemmings use it, but o would not call it a popular example.
Experts are supposed to break it down to them. But yeah, this is a flawed system but I fear the honnest take is that most humans know nothing about most things (even if we’re tempted to believe otherwise), so you’d be running out of avalaible judges real quick.
That’s a fair point. This case is even more complicated, as either the author of the article doesn’t know what they’re talking about, or a word was missing. The article says the judge wasn’t sure if mozilla was a browser or search engine, and Mozilla is neither.
I still hate the confidently incorrect assertions people in charge are making to negatively impact the way the largest and most complete telecommunications and information system works. Just look at facebooks trial where zuck had to explain how the internet works to the people who were deciding if his company was doing something wrong.
That just…seems so wrong. My mentally declining grandmother used firefox back in the 00s era (though now that I think about it, my uncle is a developer, so maybe he set up the computer). How have we backslid since then to where so few people know/use firefox?
Actually yes. Around 2010 Firefox still had like 60% market share. Now, chrome dominates the market and Firefox is in single digits. Chrome gives you so many conveniences, and only a small amount of people care about what you give up for those conveniences. “My data isn’t important. Who cares about what I do?” Is a common response to data mining and sharing.
Most people don’t want to put the time and effort into researching these things. Most people just don’t have the energy.
But again if you don’t know anything about a topic you are asked to make a decision on, you should recuse yourself. It’s unfortunate that most people making decisions about tech know very little about it.
Another thing not being considered by all the “judge doesn’t know anything” crowd is that they’re failing to consider that this case isn’t really about search engines or Alphabet as a company.
It’s about monopoly laws. In this case, pertaining to Google and Mozilla, but monopolies nonetheless.
I’m 46 and I know the difference.
Yeah but your on lemmy so your a write off (and so am I)
Hey there! Don’t want to nitpick, but it is spelled „you‘re“ in your case. „Your“ is used when you‘re talking about possessive attribution. „Your car“ vs „you‘re (you are) driving a car“.
As long as we’re nitpicking, in English, we only use the upper quotation marks, e.g. “you’re”.
That’s good to know, thank you! I‘ll try to keep it in mind from now on.
Wait, you actually didn’t know? No judgement, I’m just surprised.
The other thing you might want to know is that if you want to get fancy and use different opening and closing quotation marks, they curve the opposite way to what you’re used to, “like this.”
I did at some point, but I keep mixing it up with my native language rule for quotations. I study both german and english language and should actually know better, lol. The rules of written language are fascinating to me, so I appreciate any corrections!
That’s interesting!
Only a few years older than me. Absolutely not yet old enough to be a boomer.
Yet? How would one turn into a boomer?
Use your favorite search engine (mine is called firefox) to browse the google and connect with your friends on a facebook
We don’t have Facebook is AltaVista okay?
I was thinking of cancelling my Internet service, I only use the facebooks and sometimes emails I don’t use the Internet anymore.
-my mom.
I have heard of this social media called MSN Messenger but it doesn’t seem available on the AOL? I don’t see it, anyway. Maybe I should just email Bill Gate?
No, you should be using Fark.
When you start posting searches in your Facebook status.
“Mysterious purple spot on butt cheek”
By being born between 1940 and 1955. Now it’s mostly a generalization of “people that are older than me”.
1946 to 1964 actually.
Post second war indeed. I knew something was off.
you need to declare it yourself, like possession
OK boomer (someone had to say it)
Lots of people of my gen were utterly clueless about computers growing up-- it was arcane nerd shit.
You didn’t have to know how to use a computer until much later in life in a number of careers.
Hell, my university still had rentable typewriters in the library, which still had a physical card catalog (alongside the new computerized one), and we still wrote tests by hand (essay or otherwise). Laptops weren’t a thing. And not everyone had a PC/Mac. The Internet was something most students were oblivious to. The web was only just in its infancy and only the nerds knew about it as a curious novelty. Hell, there wasn’t even DNS back then. Everyone downloaded a “hosts” file.
Even so, I’m still struggling to imagine how a person still doesn’t know the difference between a search engine and a browser, though.
Then again, I suppose some people are just really awful at analytical thinking – understanding how to decompose complex things. Understanding how the parts and pieces work. The people who were really bad at that kind of thing probably would have steered clear of computers as much as possible.
So, ok, maybe if a person avoids computers in undergrad and law school in the 90s then becomes a lawyer, they can just actively avoid computers in their job. That’s one career where maybe that’s possible because, by the time computers become truly ubiquitous, your assistants that can do the computer stuff for you.
I’m disappointed in arstechnica for only supporting their provocative headline (Judge in US v. Google trial didn’t know if Firefox is a browser or search engine) with this vagueness in the article:
While Cavanaugh delivered his opening statement, Mehta even appeared briefly confused by some of the references to today’s tech, unable to keep straight if Mozilla was a browser or a search engine. He also appeared unclear about how SEM works and struggled to understand the options for Microsoft to promote Bing ads outside of Google’s SEM tools.
What did he actually say?!
Plus it’s an opening statement. It’s an intro that tells the finder of fact (traditionally a jury, but for cases like this it’s the judge) what evidence you’re going to present during the trial. You want that person to be able to place that argument in context, but the very nature of explaining that “I’m going to show you a bunch of stuff” is going to have a bunch of “well I haven’t seen it yet, so can you tell me what to expect” responses.
Especially if there’s a discussion of the different contractual relationships and the different companies and products. I’ve seen plenty of judges insist on clarity when communicating about things that might have more than one meaning: a company that has the same name as a product that company produces (Toyota makes Toyotas), a legal entity that has the same name as a place (Madison Square Garden banned someone from Madison Square Garden), etc.
For all we know, the confusion might be one of the lawyer’s fault, for using the words Mozilla or Firefox interchangeably, the way this article seems to.
I think its also important to note, he was not explicitly unclear about what Firefox was, he was unclear about what Mozilla was. It’s admittedly still not great, but I think it’s a little more understandable a thing to be unfamiliar with than the browser itself. I’d really rather the title referred to Mozilla because of this, as really there’s little to definitively back up its claim that the judge is unfamiliar with Firefox, just that he is to some degree unfamiliar with the company that makes it. Again, still far from ideal, but not nearly as egregious as they’re trying to make it sound.
|unable to keep straight if Mozilla was a browser or a search engine
It is neither. It is a foundation that maintains a browser. It is like asking if Microsoft is a browser or a search engine.
if Microsoft is a browser or a search engine.
yes
No
Yes! Stop fighting the status quo
Allow to introduce ‘I have problem with the Google’.
E: wording.
You mean the Google Bing?
Let me quickly Google that in Bing Bing Go
So true
It would be naive to expect Google to be broken by anti-trust laws, just look how microsoft dodged that in the 2000 and went back to the same practices today . this is a circus show
<s>Welcome to American politics. </s>
Welcome to politics.
For strike through, use ~~content~~
exampleYou forgot the /s frienderino
Tips fedora
How can anyone make a judgement about something they know nothing about? We are so doomed.
They do so all the time - do you think judges are experts in every thing? The judge needs to understand the law. It’s up to the counsel to ensure they have experts to explain the details.
Judges should specialize in certain areas for this exact reason. They should absolutely understand the material as well as the law.
They don’t need to be an expert. They need to be people that have basic knowledge of how the world around them works, and the ability to learn new things as that world changes. I mean that’s the basic requirement at any job I have ever had, why are they exempt?
I’m assuming they asked what it was? Or for clarification? If so, then they learned.
Wasnt there that judge who went and learned programming in order tp preside over a software patents case?
As if this has doomed humanity before.
Judging without knowing has been practically sport for most of humanity’s history.
Just because it’s done that way doesn’t mean we can’t fix the issue.
Oh for sure. I was just pinpointing the fatalistic reaction.
It’s not “fatalistic”, it’s “fine” this way.
A judge doesn’t have to know what mozilla is before a trial starts. Council can tell them what it is, how/whether it matters to the case, etc.
It’s the lawyers that have the duty to inform the judge. You can’t rely on every judge knowing everything about all topics. And they don’t really need to…
I mean… gestures wildly at, like, everything
Right? It’s a good thing this judge is asking questions.
Imagine how fucked we would be with zoomers for judges and then count your blessings ;)
Completely brain dead take
I think you mean complete shit post
Where’s the punch line? Please explain the joke to me
There is no punch line. And no joke. It’s a shitpost so there is little to explain.
You already won bro put away your confusion and pat yourself on the back 👍
Holy shit you mean the generation that’s actually going to be effected by their own decisions? What would make that worse? Please expand
nah
Because you’re a dipshit
alright
Google trial didn’t know if Firefox is a browser or search engine::Google accused DOJ of aiming to force people to use “inferior” search products.
Google search is an inferior search product.
Google, Twitch, and Reddit are proof that your business cannot relay on a middle man without that middle man creating a monopoly that shits itself
God the nightmare we will get when Gaben passes…
Valve is directly owned by him with no stockholder nonsense, as I understand it, so perhaps he has willed it to someone who will handle it well. Hopefully. I don’t like everything about Steam, but I do like that, assuming I’m not misinformed.
What I’m paranoid is that it seems companies have started giving out arbitrary bans as part of a power trip.
My friend’s an Overwatch Streamer and they shot him with a one-month ban for “Being Toxic”
His toxic behavior was… “Asking people to stop using racial slurs in voice chat”
I remember hearing that his son would take the reigns after his death and that his son shares the same values as Gabe. So hopefully we’re fine for the foreseeable future on that front. Assuming I’m remembering that right at least.
I’m not gonna lie, and I hate to admit it, but I actually really like Bing’s ChatGPT integration. For basic searches, it does all the legwork and gets you a summarized answer with sources for more info. It even works great on really obscure topics…
It is now but it wasn’t always.
When asked about a perceived ignorance in computers, the judge proclaimed, “I’m not ignorant about computers! In fact, just last week I finished Space Quest, and I’m now getting through Leisure Suit Larry!” The judge’s report, written using WordPerfect 5.1, is expected to be released soon.
I’ll have you know that I just recently had a user incredibly upset because their word perfect files did not automatically identify as word documents.
I’m not surprised at all. Only people who work in IT are aware or care about anything other then the default apps and operating systems.
I really think it’s a matter of context; how one was raised, what kind of people one interacts with, interest, etc.
I’m older and i know so much more than most of my age group. I learned a long, long time ago to not be afraid to try things out, my pc is not going to explode; to investigate when i’m stuck with some computer stuff; and i have adult kids who teach me things that i don’t know enough about or share their views. Some of the communities i subscribed to are about tech, FOSS, android etc. I’m always really open to boost my knowledge.
Yeah, that’s great and all. But this judge shouldn’t be ruling over this case if he doesn’t know the basics of today’s technology.
I feel like most average people (regardless of age) don’t even know alternatives to internet browsers exist, so why would I expect a judge to know? They’re obviously not experts in every field, it’s up to the attorneys to inform them and persuade them one way or another.
Are people here unable to see that the layman might not know what Firefox is off-hand?
Are people here unable to see that the layman might not know what Firefox is off-hand?
I don’t think it’s that. I think most people want a judge who’s knowledgeable enough on the subject that he/she’s actually judging.
Bringing in experts to educate him during the court case is not right, he’s supposed to be able to judge if the experts are actually experts and know what they’re talking about, by the time the actual case is happening.
I don’t care, i use Duck.
This guy ducks
So, you’re saying people should go get Ducked?
I mean, i use Duckduckgo dude lmao
So I got to wonder, when that judge goes home at night, does his family, and especially his kids, let him know what everyone is saying about him in relation to this article?
And then I wonder how that affects him going into court the next day, when he has to ask more ‘dumb’ questions, does he actually ask or not.
Tech just isn’t his expertise.
Mehta has been described as an avid fan of hip hop music. In a 2015 copyright case regarding the similarity of two songs, Mehta noted in a footnote that he was "not a ‘lay person’ when it comes to hip-hop music and lyrics,” and noted he has “listened to hip hop for decades”. American rappers Jay-Z, Eminem, Kanye West and Canadian rapper Drake are among his favorite artists.
Amazing underrated comment right here.
His job is to ask those questions. If he doesn’t do it, his reasoning will be flawed and then the case will restart with a new judge when appealed, wasting everyone’s time and money. I gotta imagine that’s more embarrassing to a judge than asking these questions.
His family and friends are likely a bubble and thus never see the article to begin with.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Today, US District Judge Amit Mehta heard opening statements in the Department of Justice’s antitrust case challenging Google’s search dominance.
To prove this, the DOJ plans to bring in Hal Varian, who served as Google’s chief economist at that time.
William Cavanaugh, a lawyer representing the state of Colorado, also appeared to raise one unique claim still being weighed in this case regarding Google’s search engine marketing (SEM) tool SA 360.
During the more than 10-year time period that the case covers, browsers, phones, and search engines all evolved rapidly.
So, on top of weighing complicated antitrust questions, Mehta might also struggle to keep track of basic facts like how search was conducted at any given point in the case’s timeline.
While Cavanaugh delivered his opening statement, Mehta even appeared briefly confused by some of the references to today’s tech, unable to keep straight if Mozilla was a browser or a search engine.
The original article contains 496 words, the summary contains 153 words. Saved 69%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I think the automotive analogy is relevant, some think using technology means they understand it. I’m a pretty good driver, but it would be unwise to ask me to repair your car’s transmission. My grandmother spends more time on her computer glued to Facebook than I spend using my computer on a given day, but I’m not asking her to build my next gaming rig.
Why do they call it Firefox only once in the title but Mozilla in the article? And why do they refer to “Meta” as “Mehta”?
Mehta is the name of the judge.
Oh well, that clears some things up. Sorry, not a native speaker.
