Judge in US v. Google trial didn’t know if Firefox is a browser or search engine
arstechnica.com
Google accused DOJ of aiming to force people to use “inferior” search products.
    • Da_Boom@iusearchlinux.fyiEnglish
      6·
      10 months ago

      I know people in their 30s that don’t know the difference between browsers. I know many 20 year Olds that call the internet “wifi” and I know people who think chrome and the internet are the same thing.

      Age hasn’t got anything to do with it.

      • pec@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        2·
        10 months ago

        Exactly, it’s not about age it’s about professionalism. A judge should have an abstract understanding of the concepts and objects at the center of the trial.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldBEnglish
    4·
    10 months ago

    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!