Below are the most recent 30 comments. I try to keep it clean of comment spam, but some times things
get through and it takes me several hours to get to it. So please excuse any of that comment spam.
Seems like that's their goal isn't it? Just to take over the whole internet and become the monopoly on everything. Sadly enough, I think the government would let them too.
Probably be a bit like what they do with App Payments, if you find something via them, you HAVE to pay via their service... Inch by inch, they're taking over the Internet.
I hadn't seen it, thx.
I guess Google will pay $10 billion (arguments sake) and make $20 Billion back from the new monopoly where they get commission on this new marketplace feature to compete with Amazon.
Wish I had seen your post before I posted above because you're spot on about Google creating another monopoly. Did you see in the news today Apple will use Gemini to power Siri? I know this was expected by many, but now it's official.
<b>Apple picks Google’s Gemini to run AI-powered Siri coming this year</b>
<blockquote>Apple is joining forces with Google to power its artificial intelligence features, including a major Siri upgrade later this year, the tech giants said on Monday.
The multi-year partnership will lean on Google’s Gemini models and cloud technology for future Apple foundational models, according to a statement obtained by CNBC’s Jim Cramer.</blockquote>Full story: <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/12/apple-google-ai-siri-gemini.html">https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/12/apple-google-ai-siri-gemini.html</a>
<blockquote>I saw gbot interacting with our shopping cart (directly adding products to the cart with a URL and passing referrer info)</blockquote>Same. Google doesn't pass the referrer (Google) in StoreBot because it has no intent to complete a sale. When Gbot is hitting the direct product add to cart URL, it's passing Google off as the referrer as if Google wants credit for the sale if it occurs.
Here we go with another Google imposed standard that gives them more control over the industry. Some of us sell products that have safety considerations and bypassing the product detail pages would leave some customers clueless to these considerations. Also purchasing, without agreeing to our terms, increases our liability exposure. Is there an opt-out option or must stores disable their product feeds to avoid the headaches these purchasing agents pose?
How long will it be before Google becomes their own payment processor and processes the transactions themselves? Or will Google demand these processors share a percentage of each sale with them or get booted out? As with anything Google is involved with, at a minimum I expect this to increase their revenue by dipping into processor's revenue which they will recover by increasing the fees they charge us.
In other words: Google is now trying to manipulate publishers into making their raw content even less user-friendly, by telling them to size up their content, even if the nature of the content doesn't demand or justify that.
This will make in turn users want less and less read their over-lengthy articles, and will more and more push them towards consumption of content through AI, which will be either able to create a summary on the fly, or integrate and present the content wholly and exclusively through AI mode and chatbots, in a digested form.
Also, publishers themselves will also obviously use AI to make the articles longer (or those who will use AI will be more profitable than those who use human writers to do that), which will degrade the overall quality of their articles and speed up the way to model collapse.
Google: do this, don't do that. keep creating original, never seen before content.
also Google: can you believe these morons train our ai for free?
Google has moved Danny boy to another position since he made his false statements about potential HCU recoveries. Now he has an easy out to hide from any accountability.
Definitely don't expect him to do the honorable thing by still giving a response anyway.
Ok, if you don't get a response, then if you ever have him in an interview situation or during a Q&A or live event or whatever. If the opportunity arises, plz ask. Tyvm!
<blockquote>I dont even see a removed comment.</blockquote>LOL
I think @pmbbrent:disqus is referring to this comment: <a href="http://disq.us/p/34t9k75">http://disq.us/p/34t9k75</a>
No question Biden was a weak President, but I think this points to the bigger problem of age in politics. At least Biden did buck some in his own party and stood by Israel, so I'll give him that credit. Looking back I can't help but think he may have been dealing with symptoms involving his prostate cancer. I wouldn't be surprised if he put off the diagnosis/treatment while he was in office because it would have made him appear weak. I wish him well.
Business was good under Trump's first Presidency. This time around it's bad, and I mean very bad. Certainly this has a lot to do with Google. Trump could have instructed his DOJ to appeal Judge Meathead's ruling and he didn't. Vance, who I voted for in Ohio, was sent to campaign in the EU on American big tech's behalf. Though I'm a Republican, my views don't align with the Trump admin because of the harm it has already inflicted on me personally and professionally.
Could be but Storebot handled the price/shipping validation by navigating to the product page first where it added items to the cart. What I saw last week was different, and Google passed themselves off as the referrer. If/when I see this happen again I'll post about it.
I concur about the first paragraph. I remember JD also saying about breaking up Google and now he's their biggest cheerleader.
All Trump wanted was BigTech to fall in love with him like they did with Obama/Biden and they did big time and they're being rewarded.
When it was Biden, it was Schumer who was the real a-hole in that administration with blocking AOIC & AMERICA acts from having votes. If as expected the house/senate switches and Schumer is back, don't expect anything meaning to happen.
Interesting to see Google emphasizing that AI Overviews and AI Mode are grounded in core search signals; it reinforces the importance of traditional SEO signals even as AI-driven search surfaces evolve. Integrating these signals could help reduce hallucinations and improve accuracy, but SEO strategies will still need to adapt to this hybrid ranking landscape.
I called you out because I knew you would downvote me, and you didn't let me down. Every time I seem to mention Trump, you downvote me.
Well, everything Trump seems to be doing in regards with AI looks like it was written by Google. Its so blatantly pro-Google.
During Biden's presidency, I was railing against Chuck Schumer, who kept "blocking" two acts which would have helped everyone (AOIC & AMERICA), whereas all these pro-BigTech are coming from Trump with XO. Twice, Trump failed to push through AI legislation: the Big Beautiful Bill was blocked, and Ted Cruz's private act was rejected 99-1, so Trump pushed it through as an XO.
I am UK but I wouldn't call myself Woke or Liberal. I would call out my country's politicians if the opportunity arose but I don't like going off-topic unless someone else starts it first. Keir (doesn't deserve a knighthood) wants to allow AI free reign (ignore copyright) in the UK, I'm dead set against that. I've mentioned it in the past.
UK does have censorship issues, they're trying to come up with a new law that will as people are saying silence criticism of a certain group but as its not on the topic of webmasters and websites I am not going into it.
that might be this <a href="https://www.seroundtable.com/googlebot-products-shopping-cart-29713.html">https://www.seroundtable.com/googlebot-products-shopping-cart-29713.html</a>
The USA already has permission to build as many bases on Greenland as it likes. At one time, the US had 5,000 personnel on the island, but it has since reduced that to about 150. No one is stopping the US from building any bases.
Trump is just being a bully without any clue. For many people, it's all about the rare earth minerals that can be found in Greenland and not about the defence of the USA. If it were about defence, there's no problem, just put more boots on the ground.
If Trump does push ahead with a military takeover, he'll have a hard time with his voters and fellow politicians, nevermind the Danish government. Not every republican is on board with the idea.