Google

judge-mulls-sanctions-over-google’s-“shocking”-destruction-of-internal-chats

Judge mulls sanctions over Google’s “shocking” destruction of internal chats

Antitrust law, department of justice, Google, google monopoly trial, google search ads, Policy, search engines, us v google / /
Kenneth Dintzer, litigator for the US Department of Justice, exits federal court in Washington, DC, on September 20, 2023, during the antitrust trial to determine if Alphabet Inc.'s Google maintains a monopoly in the online search business.

Enlarge / Kenneth Dintzer, litigator for the US Department of Justice, exits federal court in Washington, DC, on September 20, 2023, during the antitrust trial to determine if Alphabet Inc.’s Google maintains a monopoly in the online search business.

Near the end of the second day of closing arguments in the Google monopoly trial, US district judge Amit Mehta weighed whether sanctions were warranted over what the US Department of Justice described as Google’s “routine, regular, and normal destruction” of evidence.

Google was accused of enacting a policy instructing employees to turn chat history off by default when discussing sensitive topics, including Google’s revenue-sharing and mobile application distribution agreements. These agreements, the DOJ and state attorneys general argued, work to maintain Google’s monopoly over search.

According to the DOJ, Google destroyed potentially hundreds of thousands of chat sessions not just during their investigation but also during litigation. Google only stopped the practice after the DOJ discovered the policy. DOJ’s attorney Kenneth Dintzer told Mehta Friday that the DOJ believed the court should “conclude that communicating with history off shows anti-competitive intent to hide information because they knew they were violating antitrust law.”

Mehta at least agreed that “Google’s document retention policy leaves a lot to be desired,” expressing shock and surprise that a large company like Google would ever enact such a policy as best practice.

Google’s attorney Colette Connor told Mehta that the DOJ should have been aware of Google’s policy long before the DOJ challenged the conduct. Google had explicitly disclosed the policy to Texas’ attorney general, who was involved in DOJ’s antitrust suit over both Google’s search and adtech businesses, Connor said.

Connor also argued that Google’s conduct wasn’t sanctionable because there is no evidence that any of the missing chats would’ve shed any new light on the case. Mehta challenged this somewhat, telling Connor, “We just want to know what we don’t know. We don’t know if there was a treasure trove of material that was destroyed.”

During rebuttal, Dintzer told Mehta that Google’s decision to tell Texas about the policy but not the federal government did not satisfy their disclosure obligation under federal rules of civil procedure in the case. That rule says that “only upon finding that the party acted with the intent to deprive another party of the information’s use in the litigation may” the court “presume that the lost information was unfavorable to the party.”

The DOJ has asked the court to make that ruling and issue four orders sanctioning Google. They want the court to order the “presumption that deleted chats were unfavorable,” the “presumption that Google’s proffered justification” for deleting chats “is pretextual” (concealing Google’s true rationale), and the “presumption that Google intended” to delete chats to “maintain its monopoly.” The government also wants a “prohibition on argument by Google that the absence of evidence is evidence of adverse inference,” which would stop Google from arguing that the DOJ is just assuming the deleted chats are unfavorable to Google.

Mehta asked Connor if she would agree that, at “minimum,” it was “negligent” of Google to leave it to employees to preserve chats on sensitive discussions, but Connor disagreed. She argued that “given the typical use of chat,” Google’s history-off policy was “reasonable.”

Connor told Mehta that the DOJ must prove that Google intended to hide evidence for the court to order sanctions.

That intent could be demonstrated another way, Mehta suggested, recalling that “Google has been very deliberate in advising employees about what to say and what not to say” in discussions that could indicate monopolistic behaviors. That included telling employees, “Don’t use the term markets,” Mehta told Connor, asking if that kind of conduct could be interpreted as Google’s intent to hide evidence.

But Connor disagreed again.

“No, we don’t think you can use it as evidence,” Connor said. “It’s not relevant to the claims in this case.”

But during rebuttal, Dintzer argued that there was evidence of its relevance. He said that testimony from Google employees showed that Google’s chat policy “was uniformly used as a way of communicating without creating discoverable information” intentionally to hide the alleged antitrust violations.

Judge mulls sanctions over Google’s “shocking” destruction of internal chats Read More »

apple-deal-could-have-been-“suicide”-for-google,-company-lawyer-says

Apple deal could have been “suicide” for Google, company lawyer says

Antitrust law, Apple, department of justice, Google, google monopoly trial, monopoly, Policy, us v google / /

Woulda coulda shoulda? —

Judge: What should Google have done to avoid the DOJ’s crosshairs?

–

John Schmidtlein, partner at Williams & Connolly LLP and lead litigator for Alphabet Inc.'s Google, arrives to federal court in Washington, DC, US, on Monday, Oct. 2, 2023.

Enlarge / John Schmidtlein, partner at Williams & Connolly LLP and lead litigator for Alphabet Inc.’s Google, arrives to federal court in Washington, DC, US, on Monday, Oct. 2, 2023.

Halfway through the first day of closing arguments in the Department of Justice’s big antitrust trial against Google, US District Judge Amit Mehta posed the question that likely many Google users have pondered over years of DOJ claims that Google’s market dominance has harmed users.

“What should Google have done to remain outside the crosshairs of the DOJ?” Mehta asked plaintiffs halfway through the first of two full days of closing arguments.

According to the DOJ and state attorneys general suing, Google has diminished search quality everywhere online, primarily by locking rivals out of default positions on devices and in browsers. By paying billions for default placements that the government has argued allowed Google to hoard traffic and profits, Google allegedly made it nearly impossible for rivals to secure enough traffic to compete, ultimately decreasing competition and innovation in search by limiting the number of viable search engines in the market.

The DOJ’s lead litigator, Kenneth Dintzer, told Mehta that what Google should have done was acknowledge that the search giant had an enormous market share and consider its duties more carefully under antitrust law. Instead, Dintzer alleged, Google chose the route of “hiding” and “destroying documents” because it was aware of conflicts with antitrust law.

“What should Google have done?” Dintzer told Mehta. “They should have recognized that by demanding locking down every default that they were opening themselves up to a challenge on the conduct.”

The most controversial default agreement that Google has made is a 21-year deal with Apple that Mehta has described as the “heart” of the government’s case against Google. During the trial, a witness accidentally blurted out Google’s carefully guarded secret of just how highly it values the Apple deal, revealing that Google pays 36 percent of its search advertising revenue from Safari just to remain the default search tool in Apple’s browser. In 2022 alone, trial documents revealed that Google paid Apple $20 billion for the deal, Bloomberg reported.

That’s in stark contrast to the 12 percent of revenue that Android manufacturers get from their default deals with Google. The government wants the court to consider all these default deals to be anti-competitive, with Dintzer suggesting during closing arguments that they are the “centerpiece” of “a lot” of Google’s exclusionary behavior that ultimately allowed Google to become the best search engine today—by “capturing the default and preventing rivals from getting access to those defaults.”

Google’s lawyers have argued that Google succeeds on its merits. Today, lead litigator John Schmidtlein repeatedly pointed out that antitrust law is designed to protect the competitive process, not specific competitors who fail to invest and innovate—as Microsoft did by failing to recognize how crucial mobile search would become.

“Merely getting advantages by winning on quality, they may have an effect on a rival, but the question is, does it have an anti-competitive effect?” Schmidtlein argued, noting that the DOJ hadn’t “shown that absent the agreements, Microsoft would have toppled Google.”

But Dintzer argued that “a mistake by one rival doesn’t mean that Google gets to monopolize this market forever.” When asked to explain why everyone—including some of Google’s rivals—testified that Google won contracts purely because it was the best search engine, Dintzer warned Mehta that the fact that Google’s rivals “may be happy cashing Google’s checks doesn’t tell us anything.”

According to Schmidtlein, Google could have crossed the line with the Apple deal, but it didn’t.

“Google didn’t go on to say to Apple, if you don’t make us the default, no Google search on Apple devices at all,” Schmidtlein argued. “That would be suicide for Google.”

It’s still unclear how Mehta may be leaning in this case, interrogating both sides with care and making it clear that he expects all his biggest questions to be answered after closing arguments conclude Friday evening.

But Mehta did suggest at one point today that it seemed potentially “impossible” for anyone to compete with Google for default placements.

“How would anybody be able to spend billions and billions of dollars to possibly dislodge Google?” Mehta asked. “Is there any real competition for the default spot?”

According to Schmidtlein, that is precisely what “competition on the merits” looks like.

“Google is winning because it’s better, and Apple is deciding Google is better for users,” Schmidtlein argued. “The antitrust laws are not designed to ensure a competitive market. They’re designed to ensure a competitive process.”

Proving the potential anti-competitive effects of Google’s default agreements, particularly the Apple deal, has long been regarded as the most critical point in order to win the government’s case. So it’s no surprise that the attorney representing state attorneys general, Bill Cavanaugh, praised Mehta for asking, “What should Google have done?” According to Cavanaugh, that was the “right question” to pose in this trial.

“What should they have done 10 years ago when there was a recognition” that “we’re monopolists” and “we have substantial control in markets” is ask, “How should we proceed with our contracts?” Cavanaugh argued. “That’s the question that they answered, but they answered it in the wrong way.”

Seemingly if Google’s default contracts posed fewer exclusionary concerns, the government seems to be arguing, there would be more competition and therefore more investment and innovation in search. But as long as Google controls the general search market, the government alleged that users won’t be able to search the web the way that they want.

Google is hoping that Mehta will reject the government’s theories and instead rule that Google has done nothing to stop rivals from improving the search landscape. Early in the day, Mehta told the DOJ that he was “struggling to see” how Google has either stopped innovating or degraded its search engine as a result of lack of competition.

Closing arguments continue on Friday. Mehta is not expected to rule until late summer or early fall.

Apple deal could have been “suicide” for Google, company lawyer says Read More »

email-microsoft-didn’t-want-seen-reveals-rushed-decision-to-invest-in-openai

Email Microsoft didn’t want seen reveals rushed decision to invest in OpenAI

antitrust, Bill Gates, department of justice, Google, google antitrust trial, google monopoly trial, microsoft, openai, Policy, Satya Nadella, us v google / /

I’ve made a huge mistake —

Microsoft CTO made a “mistake” dismissing Google’s AI as a “game-playing stunt.”

–

Email Microsoft didn’t want seen reveals rushed decision to invest in OpenAI

In mid-June 2019, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates and CEO Satya Nadella received a rude awakening in an email warning that Google had officially gotten too far ahead on AI and that Microsoft may never catch up without investing in OpenAI.

With the subject line “Thoughts on OpenAI,” the email came from Microsoft’s chief technology officer, Kevin Scott, who is also the company’s executive vice president of AI. In it, Scott said that he was “very, very worried” that he had made “a mistake” by dismissing Google’s initial AI efforts as a “game-playing stunt.”

It turned out, Scott suggested, that instead of goofing around, Google had been building critical AI infrastructure that was already paying off, according to a competitive analysis of Google’s products that Scott said showed that Google was competing even more effectively in search. Scott realized that while Google was already moving on to production for “larger scale, more interesting” AI models, it might take Microsoft “multiple years” before it could even attempt to compete with Google.

As just one example, Scott warned, “their auto-complete in Gmail, which is especially useful in the mobile app, is getting scarily good.”

Microsoft had tried to keep this internal email hidden, but late Tuesday it was made public as part of the US Justice Department’s antitrust trial over Google’s alleged search monopoly. The email was initially sealed because Microsoft argued that it contained confidential business information, but The New York Times intervened to get it unsealed, arguing that Microsoft’s privacy interests did not outweigh the need for public disclosure.

In an order unsealing the email among other documents requested by The Times, US District Judge Amit Mehta allowed to be redacted some of the “sensitive statements in the email concerning Microsoft’s business strategies that weigh against disclosure”—which included basically all of Scott’s “thoughts on OpenAI.” But other statements “should be disclosed because they shed light on Google’s defense concerning relative investments by Google and Microsoft in search,” Mehta wrote.

At the trial, Google sought to convince Mehta that Microsoft, for example, had failed to significantly invest in mobile early on, giving Google a competitive advantage in mobile search that it still enjoys today. Scott’s email seems to suggest that Microsoft was similarly dragging its feet on investing in AI until Scott’s wakeup call.

Nadella’s response to the email was immediate. He promptly forwarded the email to Microsoft’s chief financial officer, Amy Hood, on the same day that he received it. Scott’s “very good email,” Nadella told Hood, explained “why I want us to do this.” By “this,” Nadella presumably meant exploring investment opportunities in OpenAI.

Mere weeks later, Microsoft had invested $1 billion into OpenAI, and there have been billions more invested since through an extended partnership agreement. In 2024, the two companies’ finances appeared so intertwined that the European Union suspected Microsoft was quietly controlling OpenAI and began investigating whether the companies still operate independently. Ultimately, the EU dismissed the probe, deciding that Microsoft’s $13 billion in investments did not amount to an acquisition, Reuters reported.

Officially, Microsoft has said that its OpenAI partnership was formed “to accelerate AI breakthroughs to ensure these benefits are broadly shared with the world”—not to keep up with Google.

But at the Google trial, Nadella testified about the email, saying that partnering with companies like OpenAI ensured that Microsoft could continue innovating in search, as well as in other Microsoft services.

On the stand, Nadella also admitted that he had overhyped AI-powered Bing as potentially shaking up the search market, backing up the DOJ by testifying that in Silicon Valley, Internet search is “the biggest no-fly zone.” Even after partnering with OpenAI, Nadella said that for Microsoft to compete with Google in search, there are “limits to how much artificial intelligence can reshape the market as it exists today.”

During the Google trial, the DOJ argued that Google’s alleged search market dominance had hindered OpenAI’s efforts to innovate, too. “OpenAI’s ChatGPT and other innovations may have been released years ago if Google hadn’t monopolized the search market,” the DOJ argued, according to a Bloomberg report.

Closing arguments in the Google trial start tomorrow, with two days of final remarks scheduled, during which Mehta will have ample opportunity to ask lawyers on both sides the rest of his biggest remaining questions.

It’s somewhat obvious what Google will argue. Google has spent years defending its search business as competing on the merits—essentially arguing that Google dominates search simply because it’s the best search engine.

Yesterday, the US district court also unsealed Google’s proposed legal conclusions, which suggest that Mehta should reject all of the DOJ’s monopoly claims, partly due to the government’s allegedly “fatally flawed” market definitions. Throughout the trial, Google has maintained that the US government has failed to show that Google has a monopoly in any market.

According to Google, even its allegedly anticompetitive default browser agreement with Apple—which Mehta deemed the “heart” of the DOJ’s monopoly case—is not proof of monopoly powers. Rather, Google insisted, default browser agreements benefit competition by providing another avenue through which its rivals can compete.

The DOJ hopes to prove Google wrong, arguing that Google has gone to great lengths to block rivals from default placements and hide evidence of its alleged monopoly—including training employees to avoid using words that monopolists use.

Mehta has not yet disclosed when to expect his ruling, but it could come late this summer or early fall, AP News reported.

If Google loses, the search giant may be forced to change its business practices or potentially even break up its business. Nobody knows what that would entail, but when the trial started, a coalition of 20 civil society and advocacy groups recommended some potentially drastic remedies, including the “separation of various Google products from parent company Alphabet, including breakouts of Google Chrome, Android, Waze, or Google’s artificial intelligence lab Deepmind.”

Email Microsoft didn’t want seen reveals rushed decision to invest in OpenAI Read More »

critics-question-tech-heavy-lineup-of-new-homeland-security-ai-safety-board

Critics question tech-heavy lineup of new Homeland Security AI safety board

AI, AI ethics, AI safety, alphabet, Amazon, Anthropic, Biz & IT, DHS, Dr. Margaret Mitchell, executive order, Google, Joe Biden, machine learning, Meta, microsoft, NVIDIA, openai, Policy, President Biden, sam altman, Satya Nadella, Sundar Pichai / /

Adventures in 21st century regulation —

CEO-heavy board to tackle elusive AI safety concept and apply it to US infrastructure.

–

A modified photo of a 1956 scientist carefully bottling

On Friday, the US Department of Homeland Security announced the formation of an Artificial Intelligence Safety and Security Board that consists of 22 members pulled from the tech industry, government, academia, and civil rights organizations. But given the nebulous nature of the term “AI,” which can apply to a broad spectrum of computer technology, it’s unclear if this group will even be able to agree on what exactly they are safeguarding us from.

President Biden directed DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to establish the board, which will meet for the first time in early May and subsequently on a quarterly basis.

The fundamental assumption posed by the board’s existence, and reflected in Biden’s AI executive order from October, is that AI is an inherently risky technology and that American citizens and businesses need to be protected from its misuse. Along those lines, the goal of the group is to help guard against foreign adversaries using AI to disrupt US infrastructure; develop recommendations to ensure the safe adoption of AI tech into transportation, energy, and Internet services; foster cross-sector collaboration between government and businesses; and create a forum where AI leaders to share information on AI security risks with the DHS.

It’s worth noting that the ill-defined nature of the term “Artificial Intelligence” does the new board no favors regarding scope and focus. AI can mean many different things: It can power a chatbot, fly an airplane, control the ghosts in Pac-Man, regulate the temperature of a nuclear reactor, or play a great game of chess. It can be all those things and more, and since many of those applications of AI work very differently, there’s no guarantee any two people on the board will be thinking about the same type of AI.

This confusion is reflected in the quotes provided by the DHS press release from new board members, some of whom are already talking about different types of AI. While OpenAI, Microsoft, and Anthropic are monetizing generative AI systems like ChatGPT based on large language models (LLMs), Ed Bastian, the CEO of Delta Air Lines, refers to entirely different classes of machine learning when he says, “By driving innovative tools like crew resourcing and turbulence prediction, AI is already making significant contributions to the reliability of our nation’s air travel system.”

So, defining the scope of what AI exactly means—and which applications of AI are new or dangerous—might be one of the key challenges for the new board.

A roundtable of Big Tech CEOs attracts criticism

For the inaugural meeting of the AI Safety and Security Board, the DHS selected a tech industry-heavy group, populated with CEOs of four major AI vendors (Sam Altman of OpenAI, Satya Nadella of Microsoft, Sundar Pichai of Alphabet, and Dario Amodei of Anthopic), CEO Jensen Huang of top AI chipmaker Nvidia, and representatives from other major tech companies like IBM, Adobe, Amazon, Cisco, and AMD. There are also reps from big aerospace and aviation: Northrop Grumman and Delta Air Lines.

Upon reading the announcement, some critics took issue with the board composition. On LinkedIn, founder of The Distributed AI Research Institute (DAIR) Timnit Gebru especially criticized OpenAI’s presence on the board and wrote, “I’ve now seen the full list and it is hilarious. Foxes guarding the hen house is an understatement.”

Critics question tech-heavy lineup of new Homeland Security AI safety board Read More »

android-tv-has-access-to-your-entire-account—but-google-is-changing-that

Android TV has access to your entire account—but Google is changing that

Google, Tech / /

It’s all just Android —

Should sideloading Chrome on an old smart TV really compromise your entire account?

–

Android TV has access to your entire account—but Google is changing that

Google

Google says it has patched a nasty loophole in the Android TV account security system, which would grant attackers with physical access to your device access to your entire Google account just by sideloading some apps. As 404 Media reports, the issue was originally brought to Google’s attention by US Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) as part of a “review of the privacy practices of streaming TV technology providers.” Google originally told the senator that the issue was expected behavior but, after media coverage, decided to change its stance and issue some kind of patch.

“My office is mid-way through a review of the privacy practices of streaming TV technology providers,” Wyden told 404 Media. “As part of that inquiry, my staff discovered an alarming video in which a YouTuber demonstrated how with 15 minutes of unsupervised access to an Android TV set-top box, a criminal could get access to private emails of the Gmail user who set up the TV.”

The video in question was a PSA from YouTuber Cameron Gray, and it shows that grabbing any Android TV device and sideloading a few apps will grant access to the current Google account. This is obvious if you know how Android works, but it’s not obvious to most users looking at a limited TV interface.

The heart of the issue is how Android treats your Google account. Since the OS started on phones, every Android device starts with the assumption that it is a private, one-person device. Google has built on top of that feature with multiuser support and guest accounts, but these aren’t part of the default setup flow, can be hard to find, and are probably disabled on many Android TV boxes. The result is that signing in to an Android TV device often gives it access to your entire Google account.

Android has a centralized Google account system shared by a million Google-centric background and syncing processes, the Play Store, and nearly all Google apps. When you boot an Android device for the first time, the guided setup asks for a Google account, which is expected to live on the device forever as the owner’s primary account. Any new Google app you add to your device automatically gets access to this central Google account repository, so if you set up the phone and then install Google Keep, Keep automatically gets signed in and gains access to your notes. During the initial setup, where you might install 10 different apps that use a Google account, it would be annoying to enter your username and password over and over again.

This centralized account system is hungry for Google accounts, so any Google account you use to sign in to any Google app gets sucked into the central account system, even if you decline the initial setup. A common annoyance is to have a Google Workspace account at work, then sign into Gmail for work email and then have to deal with this useless work account showing up in the Play Store, Maps, Photos, etc.

For TVs, this presents a unique gotcha because, while you will still be forced to log in to download something from the Play Store, it’s not obvious to the user that you’re granting this device access to your entire Google account—including to potentially sensitive things like location history, emails, and messages. To the average user, a TV device just shows “TV stuff” like your YouTube recommendations and a few TV-specific Play Store apps, so you might not consider it to be a high-sensitivity sign-in. But if you just sideload a few more Google apps, you can get access to anything. Further confusing matters is Google’s OAuth strategy, which teaches users that there are things like scoped access to a Google account on third-party devices or sites, but Android does not work that way.

In the video, Gray simply grabs an Android TV device, goes to a third-party Android app site, then sideloads Chrome. Chrome automatically signs in to the TV owner’s Google account and has access to all passwords and cookies, which means access to Gmail, Photos, Chat history, Drive files, YouTube accounts, AdSense, any site that allows for Google sign-in, and partial credit card info. It’s all available in Chrome without any security checks. Individual apps like Gmail and Google Photos would immediately start working, too.

As Gray’s video points out, Android TV devices can be dongles, set-top boxes, or code installed right into a TV. In businesses and hotels, they can be semi-public devices. It’s also not hard to imagine a TV device falling into the hands of someone else. You might not worry too much about forgetting a $30 Chromecast in a hotel room, or you might sign in to a hotel TV and forget to delete your account, or you might throw out a TV and not think twice about what account it’s signed in to. If an attacker gets access to any of these devices later, it’s trivial to unlock your entire Google account.

Google says it has fixed this problem, though it doesn’t explain how. The company’s statement to 404 says, “Most Google TV devices running the latest versions of software already do not allow this depicted behavior. We are in the process of rolling out a fix to the rest of the devices. As a best security practice, we always advise users to update their devices to the latest software.”

Many Android TV devices, especially those built-in to TV sets, are abandonware and run an old version of the software, but Google’s account system is updatable via the Play Store, so there’s a good chance a fix can roll out to most devices.

Android TV has access to your entire account—but Google is changing that Read More »

google-can’t-quit-third-party-cookies—delays-shut-down-for-a-third-time

Google can’t quit third-party cookies—delays shut down for a third time

browser cookies, Google, google chrome, Tech / /

This post was written in Firefox —

Google says UK regulator testing means the advertising tech will last until 2025.

–

Extreme close-up photograph of finger above Chrome icon on smartphone.

Will Chrome, the world’s most popular browser, ever kill third-party cookies? Apple and Mozilla both killed off the user-tracking technology in 2020. Google, the world’s largest advertising company, originally said it wouldn’t kill third-party cookies until 2022. Then in 2021, it delayed the change until 2023. In 2022, it delayed everything again, until 2024. It’s 2024 now, and guess what? Another delay. Now Google says it won’t turn off third-party cookies until 2025, five years after the competition.

A new blog post cites UK regulations as the reason for the delay, saying, “We recognize that there are ongoing challenges related to reconciling divergent feedback from the industry, regulators and developers, and will continue to engage closely with the entire ecosystem.” The post comes as part of the quarterly reports the company is producing with the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA).

Interestingly, the UK’s CMA isn’t concerned about user privacy but instead is worried about other web advertisers that compete with Google. The UK wants to make sure that Google isn’t making changes to Chrome to prop up its advertising business at the expense of competitors. While other browser vendors shut down third-party cookies without a second thought, Google said it wouldn’t turn off the user-tracking feature until it built an alternative advertising feature directly into Chrome, so it can track user interests to serve them relevant ads. The new advertising system, called the Topics API and “Privacy Sandbox,” launched in Chrome in 2023. Google AdSense is already compatible.

The UK is worried that Chrome’s new ad system might give Google’s ad division an unfair advantage. Google and the UK CMA are talking it out, and Google says it’s “critical that the CMA has sufficient time to review all evidence, including results from industry tests, which the CMA has asked market participants to provide by the end of June.” Google has a public testing suite for Chrome’s new ad system to allow for feedback. Given all the testing data that needs to be pored over, Google says, “We will not complete third-party cookie deprecation during the second half of Q4.” We’ll check back next year!

Google can’t quit third-party cookies—delays shut down for a third time Read More »

first-real-life-pixel-9-pro-pictures-leak,-and-it-has-16gb-of-ram

First real-life Pixel 9 Pro pictures leak, and it has 16GB of RAM

Google, Tech / /

OK, but what if I don’t care about generative AI? —

With 16GB of RAM, there’s lot of room for Google’s AI models to live in memory.

–

OnLeak's renders of the <a href='https://www.mysmartprice.com/gear/pixel-9-pro-5k-renders-360-degree-video-exclusive/'>Pixel 9 Pro XL</a>, the <a href='https://www.91mobiles.com/hub/google-pixel-9-design-render-exclusive/'>Pixel 9 Pro</a>, and the <a href = 'https://www.91mobiles.com/hub/google-pixel-9-renders-design-exclusive/'>Pixel 9.</a>” src=”https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/pixel-9-lineup-800×446.jpg”></img><figcaption> <div> <p><a data-height=Enlarge / OnLeak’s renders of the Pixel 9 Pro XL, the Pixel 9 Pro, and the Pixel 9.

OnLeaks / 91Mobiles / MySmartPrice

The usual timeline would put the Google Pixel 9 at something like five months away from launching, but that doesn’t mean it’s too early to leak! Real-life pictures of the “Pixel 9 Pro” model have landed over at Rozetked.

This prototype looks just like the renders from OnLeaks that first came out back in January. The biggest change is a new pill-shaped camera bump instead of the edge-to-edge design of old models. It looks rather stylish in real-life photos, with the rounded corners of the pill and camera glass matching the body shape. The matte back looks like it still uses the excellent “soft-touch glass” material from last year. The front and back of the phone are totally flat, with a metal band around the side. The top edge still has a signal window cut out of it, which is usually for mmWave. The Pixel 8 Pro’s near-useless temperature sensor appears to still be on the back of this prototype. At least, the spot for the temperature sensor—the silver disk right below the LED camera flash—looks identical to the Pixel 8 Pro. As a prototype any of this could change before the final release, but this is what it looks like right now.

The phone was helpfully photographed next to an iPhone 14 Pro Max, and you might notice that the Pixel 9 Pro looks a little small! That’s because this is one of the small models, with only a 6.1-inch display. Previously for Pixels, “Pro” meant “the big model,” but this year Google is supposedly shipping three models, adding in a top-tier small phone. There’s the usual big Pixel 9, with a 6.7-inch display, which will reportedly be called the “Pixel 9 Pro XL.” The new model is the “Pixel 9 Pro”—no XL—which is a small model but still with all the “Pro” trimmings, like three rear cameras. There’s also the Pixel 9 base model, which is the usual smaller phone (6.03-inch) with cut-down specs like only two rear cameras.

Rozetked.” data-height=”1056″ data-width=”1408″ href=”https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/4.jpg”>The Pixel 9 Pro prototype. It's small because this is the Rozetked.” height=”735″ src=”https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/4-980×735.jpg” width=”980″>

Enlarge / The Pixel 9 Pro prototype. It’s small because this is the “small Pro” model. There are more pictures over at Rozetked.

Rozetked says (through translation) that the phone is  “similar in size to the iPhone 15 Pro.” It runs a Tensor G4 SoC, of course, and—here’s a noteworthy spec—has a whopping 16GB of RAM according to the bootloader screen. The Pixel 8 Pro tops out at 12GB.

Anything could change between prototype and product, especially for RAM, which is usually scaled up and down in various phone tiers. A jump in RAM is something we were expecting though. As part of Google’s new AI-focused era, it wants generative AI models turned on 24/7 for some use cases. Google said as much in a recent in-house podcast, pointing to some features like a new version of Smart Reply built right into the keyboard, which “requires the models to be RAM-resident”—in other words, loaded all the time. Google’s desire to keep generative AI models in memory means less RAM for your operating system to actually do operating system things, and one solution to that is to just add more RAM. So how much RAM is enough? At one point Google said the smaller Pixel 8’s 8GB of RAM was too much of a “hardware limitation” for this approach. Google PR also recently told us the company still hasn’t enabled generative AI smart reply on Pixel 8 Pro by default with its 12GB of RAM, so expect these RAM numbers to start shooting up.

The downside is that more RAM means a more expensive phone, but this is the path Google is going down. There’s also the issue of whether or not you view generative AI as something that is so incredibly useful you need it built into your keyboard 24/7. Google wants its hardware to be “the intersection of hardware, software, and AI,” so keeping all this ChatGPT-like stuff quarantined to a single app apparently won’t be an option.

One final note: It’s weird how normal this phone looks. Usually, Pixel prototypes have a unique logo that isn’t the Google “G,” and often they are covered in identifying patterns for leak tracing. This looks like a production-worthy design, though.

First real-life Pixel 9 Pro pictures leak, and it has 16GB of RAM Read More »

youtube-puts-third-party-clients-on-notice:-show-ads-or-get-blocked

YouTube puts third-party clients on notice: Show ads or get blocked

Google, Tech / /

Blocking the ad blockers —

Google would really like it if everyone just paid for YouTube Premium instead.

–

YouTube app icon on a TV screen.

Getty Images | Chris McGrath

YouTube is putting third-party ad-blocking apps on notice. An ominous post on the official YouTube Community Help forum titled “Enforcement on Third Party Apps” says the company is “strengthening our enforcement on third-party apps that violate YouTube’s Terms of Service, specifically ad-blocking apps.” Google would really like it if you all paid for YouTube Premium.

YouTube has been coming down on third-party apps, which often enable YouTube ad blocking. The company shut down one of the most popular third-party apps, “YouTube Vanced,” in 2022. Vanced was open source, though, so new alternatives sprung up almost immediately. Vanced takes the official YouTube Android client and installs a duplicate, alternative version with a bunch of patches. It turns on all the YouTube Premium features like ad-blocking, background playback, and downloading without paying for the Premium sub. It also adds features the official app doesn’t have, like additional themes and accessibility features, “repeat” and “dislike” buttons, and the ability to turn off addictive “suggestions” that appear all over the app.

Another popular option is “NewPipe,” a from-scratch YouTube player that follows the open source ethos and is available on the FOSS-only store F-Droid. NewPipe wants a lightweight client without the proprietary code and million permissions that YouTube needs, but it also blocks ads.

Rather than going after the projects, Google says it’s going to start disrupting users who are using these apps. The post writes, “Viewers who are using these third-party apps may experience buffering issues or see the error ‘The following content is not available on this app’ when trying to watch a video.” The company continues: “We want to emphasize that our terms don’t allow third-party apps to turn off ads because that prevents the creator from being rewarded for viewership, and Ads on YouTube help support creators and let billions of people around the world use the streaming service.”

If you remember back to when Google aggressively fought to keep third-party YouTube apps off of Windows Phone, the company seemed to take a similar stance against all third-party YouTube clients, even if they wanted to integrate ads. Today Google says that’s no longer the case, and it would allow third-party YouTube clients provided “they follow our API Services Terms of Service.” We don’t know of any apps that are actually taking Google up on that offer, though.

YouTube puts third-party clients on notice: Show ads or get blocked Read More »

the-pixel-9-reportedly-gears-up-for-satellite-sos-support

The Pixel 9 reportedly gears up for satellite SOS support

Google, Tech / /

Android’s testbed, for better or worse —

No one wants to build an Android satellite phone, so Google is going to do it.

–

The smaller Pixel 9, with three cameras?!

Enlarge / The smaller Pixel 9, with three cameras?!

Google has been doing a lot of work in Android to support satellite-based messaging, and it sure would be nice if someone actually shipped some hardware it could use. Despite the feature launching with the iPhone 14 in 2022, Android manufacturers haven’t been super receptive to copying the idea of satellite messaging. Qualcomm and satellite company Iridium built a working solution and incorporated it into Qualcomm’s Snapdragon chips, only for zero Android manufacturers to support the feature, leading to the dissolution of the partnership. If Google wants an Android satellite SMS phone to play with, it seems like it will need to build the device itself.

Reliable leaker Kamila Wojciechowska over at Android Authority says Google is working on doing just that. It looks like the Pixel 9 will be getting emergency satellite SOS. Since the Pixel 6, Pixel phones have been the rare devices that don’t use Qualcomm modems. Google partners with Samsung and bases its Pixel Tensor chips on Samsung Exynos chips, and that means using Samsung’s (usually much maligned) modems, too. Citing a source, Wojciechowska says the Pixel 9 would use the new Exynos Modem 5400, along with its optional NTN (non-terrestrial network) capabilities, allowing the phone to be “the first to support Android’s native satellite implementation.” The initial service provider would be T-Mobile (just like the good old days).

The move would make sense. The whole original point of the Nexus/Pixel line was to give Google something to build Android on. By incorporating the latest hardware features into the next Pixel, Android gets a target to program for and test on. Otherwise, we’d have a chicken-and-egg problem where no one makes the hardware because there’s no software support, and no one makes software because there’s no hardware to program for. Google just does it all at once.

As for who would be powering T-Mobile’s satellite network, the company has a high-profile partnership with SpaceX, but those are LTE towers in space and work on regular devices with no special software (the recent demo was on a regular set of iPhones). The whole point of Android’s satellite implementation is dealing with traditional satellite problems like aiming at a far-away satellite, compressing the message a ton to actually make it to the satellite, and dealing with an unreliable connection. That’s not really relevant to the SpaceX partnership since that is trying to be a next-generation solution of “regular LTE in space,” designed around the world’s largest rocket and satellite network.

We’re just speculating here, but a better target for a “current-generation” system would be Skylo, which resells service from traditional satellite companies like Viasat and Inmarsat, so it would need all that aiming and unreliable connection software. In a wild coincidence, Skylo already has a press release out saying it has certified the Samsung Exynos Modem 5400 for use on its network. Skylo already has a relationship with T-Mobile, and the company powered the Motorola Satellite Link hotspot.

The Pixel 9 reportedly gears up for satellite SOS support Read More »

google-mocks-epic’s-proposed-reforms-to-end-android-app-market-monopoly

Google mocks Epic’s proposed reforms to end Android app market monopoly

android, android app marketplace, Android Apps, anticompetitive behavior, Antitrust law, App Store, epic games, epic games store, gaming, Google, Google Play Store, monopoly, Policy / /
Google mocks Epic’s proposed reforms to end Android app market monopoly

Epic Games has filed a proposed injunction that would stop Google from restricting third-party app distribution outside Google Play Store on Android devices after proving that Google had an illegal monopoly in markets for Android app distribution.

Epic is suggesting that competition on the Android mobile platform would be opened up if the court orders Google to allow third-party app stores to be distributed for six years in the Google Play Store and blocks Google from entering any agreements with device makers that would stop them from pre-loading third-party app stores. This would benefit both mobile developers and users, Epic argued in a wide-sweeping proposal that would greatly limit Google’s control over the Android app ecosystem.

US District Court Judge James Donato will ultimately decide the terms of the injunction. Google has until May 3 to respond to Epic’s filing.

A Google spokesperson confirmed to Ars that Google still plans to appeal the verdict—even though Google already agreed to a $700 million settlement with consumers and states following Epic’s win.

“Epic’s filing to the US Federal Court shows again that it simply wants the benefits of Google Play without having to pay for it,” Google’s spokesperson said. “We’ll continue to challenge the verdict, as Android is an open mobile platform that faces fierce competition from the Apple App Store, as well as app stores on Android devices, PCs, and gaming consoles.”

If Donato accepts Epic’s proposal, Google would be required to grant equal access to the Android operating system and platform features to all developers, not just developers distributing apps through Google Play. This would allow third-party app stores to become the app update owner, updating any apps downloaded from their stores as seamlessly as Google Play updates apps.

Under Epic’s terms, any app downloaded from anywhere would operate identically to apps downloaded from Google Play, without Google imposing any unnecessary distribution fees. Similarly, developers would be able to provide their own in-app purchasing options and inform users of out-of-app purchasing options, without having to use Google’s APIs or paying Google additional fees.

Notably, Epic filed its lawsuit after Google removed the Epic game Fortnite from the Google Play Store because Epic tried to offer an “Epic Direct Payment” option for in-game purchases.

“Google must also allow developers to communicate directly with their consumers, including linking from their app to a website to make purchases and get deals,” Epic said in a blog post. “Google would be blocked from using sham compliance programs like User Choice Billing to prevent competing payment options inside an app or on a developer’s website.”

Unsurprisingly, Epic’s proposed injunction includes an “anti-retaliation” section specifically aimed at protecting Epic from any further retaliation. If Donato accepts the terms, Google would be violating the injunction order if the tech giant fails to prove that it is not “treating Epic differently than other developers” by making it “disproportionately difficult or costly” for Epic to develop, update, and market its apps on Android.

That part of the injunction would seem important since, last month, Epic announced that an Epic Games Store was “coming to iOS and Android” later this year. According to Inc, Epic told Game Developers Conference attendees that its app-distribution platform will be the “first ever game-focused, multiplatform store,” working across “Android, iOS, PC and macOS.”

Google mocks Epic’s proposed reforms to end Android app market monopoly Read More »

google-kills-“one”-vpn-service,-says-“people-simply-weren’t-using-it”

Google kills “One” VPN service, says “people simply weren’t using it”

Google, google one, Tech / /

The Venn diagram of “I want a VPN” and “I trust Google” has no overlap —

Did anyone want a VPN from the Internet’s largest data collector?

–

Google kills “One” VPN service, says “people simply weren’t using it”

Aurich Lawson

Another day, another dead Google product. The Google One VPN service we complained about last week is headed to the chopping block. Google’s support documents haven’t been updated yet, but Android Authority reported on an email going out to Google One users informing them of the shutdown. 9to5Google also got confirmation of the shutdown from Google.

The Google One VPN launched in 2020 as a bonus feature for paying Google One subscribers. Google One is Google’s cloud storage subscription plan that allows users to buy extra storage for Gmail, Drive, and Google Photos. In 2020, the plan was exclusive to the expensive 2TB tier for $10 a month, but later, it was brought down to all Google One tiers, including the entry-level $2-per-month option.

By our count, Google has three VPN products, though “products” might be too strong a word since they are all essentially the same thing—VPN market segments? There’s the general Google One VPN for Android, iOS, Windows, and Mac—this is the one that’s dying. There’s also the “Pixel VPN by Google One,” which came with Pixel phones (the “Google One” branding here makes no sense since you didn’t have to subscribe to Google One) and the Google Fi VPN that’s exclusive to Google Fi Android and iOS customers.

The Google One VPN settings.

Enlarge / The Google One VPN settings.

Google

The Google One VPN that’s shutting down was by far the most flexible, with the widest platform support, and its shutdown represents Google ending VPN support for Windows and Mac. The Pixel and Fi VPNs will keep running, possibly with new branding.

A Google spokesperson told 9to5Google the Google One VPN is shutting down because “people simply weren’t using it.” The Windows client was also super buggy, and it’s probably easier to shut it down rather than fix it. There’s no shutdown date yet, but a message on this page says the VPN will be phased out “later in 2024.”

Google kills “One” VPN service, says “people simply weren’t using it” Read More »

google-cloud-rolls-out-self-designed-arm-chips-in-its-data-centers

Google Cloud rolls out self-designed Arm chips in its data centers

Google, Tech / /

This post hosted by AWS —

Google Axion-based VMs will be out in preview in the coming months.

–

A Google Axion Processor.

Enlarge / A Google Axion Processor.

Google

Google is joining the custom Arm data center chip trend. Google Cloud, the cloud platform division that competes with Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure, is following in the footsteps of those companies and rolling out its own Arm-based chip designs. Google says its new “Google Axion Processors” are “custom Arm-based CPUs designed for the data center” and offer “industry-leading performance and energy efficiency.”

Google has been developing custom data center accelerators for things like AI and video transcoding, but this is the first time the company is making a CPU. Google says it’s seeing “50% better performance and up to 60% better energy-efficiency than comparable current-generation x86-based instances.“

Google’s “Axion” chip is based on the Arm Neoverse V2 CPU, so just like the ARM chips we see on mobile devices, by making “custom” chips, these companies are closely following a lot of blueprints that Arm makes available. Google says it did include a custom microcontroller called “Titanium,” which it says handles networking, security, and storage I/O.

This is Google Cloud, so you won’t be buying anything with an “Axion” chip in it. You can pay for cloud processing that uses the new CPU, with Google naming “Google Compute Engine, Google Kubernetes Engine, Dataproc, Dataflow, Cloud Batch, and more” as services that will use the new chip. Some of these services bill by “vCPU” usage, so theoretically a faster CPU could lead to lower prices, but Google doesn’t spell that out in the post. Internally Google is also moving BigTable, Spanner, BigQuery, Blobstore, Pub/Sub, Google Earth Engine, and the YouTube Ads platform from its current Arm servers to this new custom one soon.

It’s a bit strange to tout a new cloud infrastructure CPU when the whole point of services like AWS and Google Cloud is that you don’t have to worry about the server. The services you were running will continue to run, while companies like Google, Amazon, and Microsoft can take care of all that complicated hardware and network data center stuff. Google says that Axion VMs will be available as a “preview” in “the coming months” and that Cloud customers can sign up for access.

Google Cloud rolls out self-designed Arm chips in its data centers Read More »