The remedies decided by District Judge Amit Mehta have emerged after a years-long court battle over Google’s dominance in online search.

The case centred around Google’s position as the default search engine on a range of its own products, such as Android and Chrome, as well as others made by the likes of Apple.

The US Department of Justice had demanded that Google sell Chrome – Tuesday’s decision means the tech giant can keep it, but it will be barred from having exclusive contracts and must share search data with rivals.

Google had proposed less drastic solutions, such as limiting its revenue-sharing agreements with firms like Apple to make its search engine the default on their devices and browsers.

On Tuesday, the company indicated that it viewed the ruling as a victory and said the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) probably contributed to the outcome.

“Today’s decision recognises how much the industry has changed through the advent of AI, which is giving people so many more ways to find information,” Google said in a statement after the ruling.

“This underlines what we’ve been saying since this case was filed in 2020: Competition is intense and people can easily choose the services they want,” the statement continued.

The tech giant had denied wrongdoing since charges were first filed against it in 2020, saying its market dominance is because its search engine is a superior product to others, and consumers simply prefer it to others.

Last year, Judge Mehta ruled that Google had used unfair methods to establish a monopoly over the online search market, actively working to maintain a level of dominance to the extent it broke US law.

But in his decision, Judge Mehta said a complete sell-off of Chrome was “a poor fit for this case”.

Google will also not have to sell off its Android operating system, which powers most of the world’s smartphones.

The company had argued that offloading parts of its operations, such as Android, would mean they would effectively stop working properly.

“Today’s remedy order agreed with the need to restore competition to the long-monopolised search market, and we are now weighing our options and thinking through whether the ordered relief goes far enough in serving that goal,” Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater wrote on X after the ruling.

Shares in Alphabet, Google’s parent company, jumped by more than 8% after the ruling.

Smartphone-makers such as Apple, Samsung and Motorola will also benefit.

Before the ruling, Google paid such firms billions of dollars to exclusively pre-load or promote the tech company’s products.

It was revealed at trial that Google paid more than $26bn for such deals with Apple, Mozilla and others in 2021.

Now, Google will not be allowed to enter into any exclusive contracts for Google Search, Chrome, Google Assistant or the Gemini app.

It means phone manufacturers will be free to pre-load or promote other search engines, browsers or AI assistants alongside Google’s.

Google will, however, be able to continue paying distributors for default placement.

Gene Munster, managing partner at Deepwater Asset Management, said the ruling was “good news for big tech”.

“Apple also gets a nice win because the ruling forces Google to renegotiate the search deal annually,” he said on X.

Judge Mehta’s ruling “doesn’t seem to be as draconian as the market was expecting,” said Melissa Otto, head of research at S&P Global Visible Alpha.

With Google’s search operation expected to generate close to $200bn this year, and tens of billions of that expected to go to distribution partners, it is a win-win for the major corporate players involved in the case, Ms Otto said.

But Google competitor DuckDuckGo said the order failed to “force the changes necessary to address Google’s illegal behaviour”.

“As a result, consumers will continue to suffer,” said DuckDuckGo founder and CEO Gabriel Weinberg.

The decision is not the end of the tech giant’s court battles.

Later this month, Google is scheduled to go to trial in a separate case brought by the Justice Department, where a judge found the company holds illegal monopolies in online advertising technology.

Source: BBC

In a blog post on Thursday, the company announced that over 400 million Google accounts (of the at least 1.5 billion reported since 2018) have used passkeys since rolling them out, logging over a billion authentications between them.

The majority of users find them easier to use than passwords, according to Google, adding that “since launching, passkeys have proven to be faster than passwords, since they only require users to simply unlock their device using a fingerprint, face scan or pin to log in.”

Google’s passkey milestones suggest that plenty of people are adopting the sign-on tech, but not everyone is convinced by how the rollout is going. Despite support for passkeys from Microsoft, Apple, Google, and third-party login managers like 1Password and Dashlane, plenty of people have posted about their resistance online, ranging from confusion over the need for passkey to complaints about various bugs or issues users have encountered with them.

“Disappointment in the technology appears to be the norm rather than the exception,” William Brown, who runs the blog Firstyear, said in a post documenting several of these passkey issues. “The helplessness of users on these threads is obvious – and these are technical early adopters. The users we need to be advocates for changing from passwords to passkeys. If these users can’t make it work how will people from other disciplines fare?”

“Passwords have had a good run, we’ve had them for the last 70 years already. We’ve been able to work out most of the kinks with passwords, but they still suck, right?” Christiaan Brand, product manager for identity and security at Google, told The Verge. “The transition path is not always easy, and you will have a whole bunch of very vocal users who used to do things in a very specific way now all telling you that the new thing you’re doing is wrong.”

All of this suggests that the dream of creating a passwordless future will need to coexist alongside more recognized sign-in methods for the foreseeable future. “I think as an industry we need to learn a little bit. We’re trying to work through this and sometimes we make mistakes too,” said Brand.

“So we’re making some slight tweaks to certain things we’ve done, but ideally, we need to go out there and show these early adopter services a pathway for doing a conversion that would make sense.”

Brand says that over time, adding friction to the process of using potentially insecure passwords could promote passkeys as the preferred login.

“If you use your password to get into your Google account, that also means you couldn’t use your passkey, so either it’s a legitimate user that lost their device, or it’s a bad guy.” Brand gave an example in which users who sign in using a password instead of their passkey may be asked to wait 24 hours to gain access while Google conducts security checks to ensure the account hasn’t been compromised.

In efforts to bolster its security offerings during the upcoming US election, Google also announced that passkeys will soon be supported by its Advanced Protection Program (APP), which provides increased protections to high-profile Google account users like journalists, activists, politicians, and business leaders. APP users will have the option to use passkeys alone or alongside a password or hardware security key.

Cross-Account Protection, which shares security notifications about suspicious activity on a user’s Google account with connected non-Google apps they use, is also being expanded with “additional collaborations.”

Google says this will help to better protect billions of users “no matter the platform they’re on” by preventing cybercriminals from gaining access to entry points that could expose users’ other accounts.

Tuta Mail – which says it has more than ten million users worldwide – alleges that, since March, it hasn’t appeared prominently in Google searches for “encrypted email.”

The company has made a complaint to the EU claiming that Google – which has its own hugely popular Gmail service – has damaged a rival business.

Google has denied the accusation, insisting Tuta remains “easily accessible” via its search engine.

In its complaint, Tuta notes that its “ranking” – how high up Google’s search results it appears – fell dramatically in March 2024 for searches such as “secure email.”

As a result, monthly visits to pages on its website have dropped by almost 90%, Tuta’s formal complaint to the EU alleges.

“At the beginning of March 2024 Google suddenly stopped displaying our website for thousands of keywords,” it wrote in the complaint.

Following the change, traffic to its website only came from searches mentioning the name of its products.

“Google must stop this unfair limitation of showing our website in search results immediately,” Matthias Pfau, co-founder of Tuta Mail said.

‘Complex update’

Google’s algorithm uses a number of factors to determine the ranking of search results. When the algorithm is updated, it can have a big impact on businesses that rely on the visits search sends to their websites.

There was an update in early March, as a result of which Google warned there would be more fluctuations in rankings than usual.

But it denies its updates are intended to favour any particular website, including its own.

“Search ranking updates absolutely do not aim to preference Google products, or any other particular website. The email provider in question is easily accessible globally on Search,” Google wrote.

Gmail has more than a billion users worldwide. Tuta argues that “niche” email services such as its own will not be able to grow into serious competitors if they don’t appear for common search terms.

In a blog post the firm accused the company of breaching a new EU law that came into force in March, which designated some large firms, including Google, as “gatekeepers” subject to additional legal restrictions.

This includes not treating their own services more favourably than rivals.

“Google in its role as a gatekeeper is impacting the profits and marketability of our private email service Tuta Mail – a direct competitor to Google’s Gmail, which goes against the Digital Markets Act”, the company wrote.

But, according to a Google spokesperson, Tuta ranks above Gmail for a range of email-related searches, including ones that don’t mention it as a brand and those it referred to in its blog.

My mother would rest her head on my chest and say a prayer. My father would whisper, “I love you,” and touch my cheek.

I noticed it all. They thought I was asleep as they did this, but I was awake, unable to sleep.

I hadn’t been able to sleep well for months but didn’t want to take drugs to help with that because I enjoy staying awake in the darkness, my mind running wild, even if my mother tells me not to think so much.

This was nearly two years ago, when I was 17, in Cotonou, Benin, West Africa, where I grew up and was in my second year in the university. I had been visiting my parents and decided to help them with chores. While sweeping the house and listening to a song, I collapsed. I was standing and then I was on the floor.

As I lay there — semiconscious, my heart heavy — my father frantically typed into Google “what to do when someone collapses and isn’t breathing well,” and then revived me by doing chest compressions.

The next day, he took me to a cardiovascular center nearby, where I sat in front of the doctor, my hands folded, heart ramming against my chest, as she brought out a few pieces of equipment and then led me to a bed.

Waiting for the results, I bit my fingernails, tapped my feet, bobbed my head. When my doctor looked up from her laptop and tried to smile, I could see pity in her eyes.

She said I’d had a mild heart attack and told me I had coronary heart disease — the arteries supplying blood to my heart were blocked by fatty substances.

How could that be? I was a teenager.

My doctor has said it’s hereditary: My mother has high blood pressure, and my grandfather also had heart issues. Throw in the irregular heartbeat I have, and this is how I ended up with my condition.

I would have to leave school and move back in with my parents, which was not easy — moving never is, and I was not supposed to exert myself.

But it had to be done. My father was travelling more, which meant that I would now spend more time with my mother. It wasn’t ideal, but it was better for my health.

I come from a family of three, just my parents and me, but throughout my childhood, our house was always filled with extended family, which I enjoyed because, as an only child, I needed people around me.

Living with my mother now would mean seeing my cousins and grandmother regularly. And with that came a lot of talk about my love life.

One night, one of my older cousins tapped me and said, “When do you plan on getting a girlfriend? Or are you gay?”

I could feel all eyes on me.

Then another cousin said, “You know, you are sick and an only child; what if something happens to you tomorrow?”

I closed my eyes and took a deep breath. I knew what they were implying. Being an only child meant I was the one to continue my father’s lineage, and they were beginning to wonder why I had no girlfriend.

Their questions continued for a few more weeks until I’d had enough of it and decided to come out of the closet.

When I was 14, I promised myself I would never come out to the family. I was going to keep my being gay a secret until death because homophobia was rife around me and there were even legal risks. But I was now spending more time with my mother, and the words my cousins kept throwing around made the decision to come out easier.

I never told people how my mother reacted the first time she saw porn on my phone. I was 13 and confused about my sexuality when a Google search led me to a porn site. I drifted off while watching it, and the following day, I saw that my mother had my phone.

There was a knowing look in her eyes, but she didn’t say anything. It happened twice after that; still, she didn’t say anything.

Maybe that is what gave me the courage to come out to her. Perhaps that’s why a part of me knew that she wasn’t going to react as the average parent in my country might.

“Mom, I’m gay,” I said last August as she was sitting on her bed. When she didn’t say anything, I swallowed hard and repeated myself.

After a few seconds, she took my hand, smiled, and said, “I have always known and will continue to love you.” There was worry in her eyes, but she wrapped me in her arms and began to cry, making me cry too.

The first time I had a full-blown heart attack, five months later, I was back in school. We were learning how data worked when I excused myself to use the toilet. I have tried to read how heart attacks work to be able to describe it, but I can’t.

It just happens. You think everything is going well, and the next thing you know, you’re on the floor, your legs outstretched, your heart pounding.

Heart attacks are vicious; I’ve had approximately five — one full-blown and the rest mild. Each one, no matter how mild, leaves you scared and wondering when the next one might happen.

After the diagnosis, I started exercising and reducing my intake of fatty foods. I also take medication whenever I have respiratory problems — which is all the time.

But I have gotten used to the idea of having mild heart attacks at any time of day. Sometimes it’s terrible; other times, it isn’t. Sometimes I just want to give up because the thought of living like this forever scares me.

And there are times I wonder if this is a punishment for deviating from the Christian life I knew growing up, for all the times I scrolled through naked pictures of men while sitting at the back of the church, or for reading erotica during Sunday school.

But my mother always assures me that all will be well and nothing happening to me is a punishment.

“I don’t want to die. I’m scared,” I told her a few months ago.

She smiled and held my hands like she always does. She didn’t say anything, but her eyes said enough. After my first heart attack, she took time off work and spent a few weeks with me. She would sit on the couch facing me with a smile, asking if I was OK.

“You know you don’t have to,” I’d tell her.

She’d laugh and say, “I am your mother. Let me be the one to worry about you.”

Though my condition isn’t yet considered life-threatening, sometimes I wonder about how my mother will cope if I have a heart attack and don’t survive. How devastated she will be if her only child is gone. But when I look at her and hear her say a prayer, I tell myself everything will be all right.

“I see that none of your boyfriends have visited you,” she jokingly said to me one morning last June, after another mild heart attack.

I rolled my eyes at her, and she laughed. “I’m single, Mom,” I said, and she rolled her eyes at me.

The thing about heart attacks is they leave you on edge, wondering what the next one will be like. Will it be mild? Will I be eating or watching a show when it happens? What if no one is around to notice that I’m slipping away?

There was a point where I avoided all books and movies with characters who had heart issues. I also muted terms like “heart attack,” “heart failure” and “cardiovascular” on social media because I couldn’t stop worrying.

It made me irritated at the people around me. It made me angry when my mother massaged my chest. I have told my mother to adopt a child because this fear never seems to leave my mind. I ask her to go and leave me, but she never agrees.

“What if I’m not here anymore?” I say, and she replies, “One thing I know is that my son can’t die before me, and I am not dying anytime soon.”

I still get scared sometimes, but knowing that my mother will always be by my side keeps me going. When the pain, anger and frustration build up, I close my eyes and say quietly, “Keep going for Mom.” Works every time.

“You are the best,” I told her recently as she sat on my bed after my father did his nightly routine of whispering, “I love you,” to me.

It’s been almost two years since my diagnosis, but my parents haven’t stopped coming to my bed every night.

“Thank you for taking care of me,” I said. The room was dark, but I could see her smile.

“That’s why I am your mother.” She kissed my forehead before leaving the room.

Roskomnadzor, Russia’s media regulator, said on Sunday that it wrote a letter to Alphabet Inc., Google and YouTube’s parent company, seeking the removal of all restrictions imposed on state media outlets such as RBC, TV Zvezda and Sputnik.

YouTube blocked access to state-run media channels on Saturday at the request of the Ukrainian government, which Ukraine Vice Prime Minister Mykhailo Fedorov confirmed on Twitter early Saturday morning local time. 

‘We intend to help Russians and the world to know the truth. I’ve contacted @YouTube to block the propagandist Russian channels — such as Russia 24, TASS, RIA Novosti. If they are afraid of speaking the truth, so we should stop this flow of poisonous lies,’ his tweet read.

‘In response to a government request, we’ve restricted access to RT and a number of other channels in Ukraine. We will continue to monitor new developments and may take further actions,’ A YouTube spokesperson told Axios on Saturday.

The spokesperson said YouTube was also ‘pausing a number of channels’ ability to monetize on YouTube, including several Russian channels affiliated with recent sanctions’ because of ‘extraordinary circumstances in Ukraine.’

The YouTube spokesperson also said the company would be ‘significantly limiting recommendations to these channels.’ 

Earlier on Saturday, Google announced that it was blocking Russian state media channels from selling ads, just hours after YouTube, which is owned by Google, said it was blocking Russian state media channels from selling ads on YouTube globally or being accessible in Ukraine.

Following another request from the Ukrainian government, Google also removed Russia’s state-run television network RT, formerly known as Russia Today, from its Google Play Store in Ukraine.

YouTube has removed hundreds of channels and thousands of videos over the past few days that violated its policies by engaging in ‘coordinated deception,’ CNN reported.

Virginia Democratic Sen. Mark Warner also put pressure on YouTube Friday, writing a letter saying that his staff was able to see RT monetize on the platform. 

Warner said that he alerted the Departments of Justice and Treasury to report that the platform had allowed sanctioned entities to monetize, CNN reported. 

Alphabet isn’t the only big tech company to infuriate Russian despot Vladimir Putin, as Meta said that it was banning Russian state media from running ads or monetizing content on Facebook.

Nathaniel Gleicher, Facebook’s head of security policy, announced the ban Saturday on Twitter, writing: ‘We are now prohibiting Russian state media from running ads or monetizing on our platform anywhere in the world.

‘We also continue to apply labels to additional Russian state media. These changes have already begun rolling out and will continue into the weekend.’

Putin ordered a ‘partial’ block on Facebook on Friday, with Kremlin officials claiming it was a response to the tech giant’s ‘censorship’ of its state media.

The EU has also taken actions against Russian state media and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said in a press conference Sunday that RT would be banned in the EU.

‘We will ban the Kremlin’s media machine in the EU. The state-owned Russia Today and Sputnik, and their subsidiaries, will no longer be able to spread their lies to justify Putin’s war,’ she said.

‘We are developing tools to ban their toxic and harmful disinformation in Europe,’ she added, though did not provide further details. 

Russia’s media regulator has been cracking down on the country’s own outlets, ordering media to remove reports describing the Kremlin’s attack as an ‘assault, invasion or declaration of war’, or face being blocked and fined.

In a statement, Roskomnadzor accused several independent media outlets including television channel Dozhd and the country’s top independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta of spreading ‘unreliable socially significant untrue information’ about the shelling of Ukrainian cities by the Russian army and civilian deaths.

Citing a request from the General Prosecutor’s Office, the communications regulator said the media outlets that also include Echo of Moscow radio will be blocked unless they remove the ‘unreliable information’.

‘Roskomnadzor also launched an administrative investigation into the dissemination of unreliable publicly significant information by the above-mentioned media,’ the watchdog said. The offence is punishable by a fine of up to 5 million rubles ($60,000), it said.

‘We are developing tools to ban their toxic and harmful disinformation in Europe,’ she added, though did not provide further details. 

Russia’s media regulator has been cracking down on the country’s own outlets, ordering media to remove reports describing the Kremlin’s attack as an ‘assault, invasion or declaration of war’, or face being blocked and fined.

In a statement, Roskomnadzor accused several independent media outlets including television channel Dozhd and the country’s top independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta of spreading ‘unreliable socially significant untrue information’ about the shelling of Ukrainian cities by the Russian army and civilian deaths.

Citing a request from the General Prosecutor’s Office, the communications regulator said the media outlets that also include Echo of Moscow radio will be blocked unless they remove the ‘unreliable information’.

‘Roskomnadzor also launched an administrative investigation into the dissemination of unreliable publicly significant information by the above-mentioned media,’ the watchdog said. The offence is punishable by a fine of up to 5 million rubles ($60,000), it said.

Nicolas Kurona, aged 30, said he managed to buy Google.com.ar through a normal, legal process.

“I never imagined that it was going to allow me to buy it,” he told the BBC.

Google Argentina told the BBC: “For a short term, the domain was acquired by someone else.” It added it had regained control of the domain very quickly.

The story started when Nicolas was at his desk on the outskirts of Buenos Aires on Wednesday night, designing a website for a client.

He started getting messages on WhatsApp that Google was down.

“I entered www.google.com.ar into my browser and it didn’t work,” he said. “I thought something strange was happening.”

He decided to go on to the Network Information Center Argentina (NIC) – the organisation responsible for operating the .ar country code domains. He searched for Google – and up popped Argentina’s Google domain available for purchase.

Despite thinking it would not work, he “followed the steps and then I received an email with the purchase invoice”, he said.

Nicolas shared the NIC invoice with the BBC. Google Argentina’s domain name was acquired for 270 pesos (£2.08/$2.90).

“I was frozen”

Dumbfounded, he tapped www.google.com.ar into his search bar and pressed enter. “My personal data appeared,” he said.

“I was frozen looking at the screen. I could not believe what had just happened.”

At 21.52 local time on Wednesday, Nicolas bought Google Argentina’s domain name. All of those millions of Google searches, and people coming to www.google.com.ar, were now in theory, coming to him.

“I want to make it clear that I never had any bad intentions, I just tried to buy it and the NIC allowed me to,” he said.

Nicolas’s night had, in just a few minutes, turned into a major news story.

“When the purchase process was completed and my data appeared, I knew that something was going to happen… I was really anxious,” he said.

Nicolas tweeted what had happened – to try to clarify how events had gone down, he said.

Quiero aclarar que entre a https://t.co/XtzUy8WL36 vi el nombre de https://t.co/cK20BdyuxB disponible y lo compre legalmente como corresponde!

— Nicolas David Kuroña (@Argentop) April 22, 2021

So what on earth happened?

Well, one theory is that Google had simply forgotten to renew its domain name. However, Google says its licence for the domain hadn’t expired – and was not due to expire until July 2021.

Open Data Córdoba group (which is dedicated to tracking expired Argentine domains, and tracking registered ones) backs this up. It’s still unclear why Google’s domain name was released.

Nicolas says he has no idea what happened, but it feels “slightly strange” to have so much media attention. He has been hailed as a hero in some corners of Twitter, and his tweet clarifying what happened has racked up 80,000 likes.

Nicolas says he’s just relieved that he didn’t get into trouble.

Google is investigating what went down on Wednesday. But for some reason, for a few minutes at least, Google lost control of Google Argentina this week – to a 30-year-old web designer, it seems.

James Clayton is the BBC’s North America technology reporter based in San Francisco. Follow him on Twitter @jamesclayton5.

Amanda Agyapong is the second of Kennedy Agyapong’s seven daughters.

The 23-year-old started her career in the organization as an intern.

Amanda Agyapong studied at UPenn and started her career as an account manager at Google Ann Arbor before her promotion by the internet company on Friday, April 23.

In celebration of her latest feat, Amanda took to her Instagram page to drop a Reel video that captures her dancing.

She captioned the video, “@google newly PROMOTED Black woman?? This is also dedicated to my day one Black Girl Googler squad, here’s to our continued successful careers?? From my internship, to first job, to first promotion Google has held me down but most importantly so have these ladies!”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Amanda Agyapong (@amanda_agy)

With the approval during a marathon, partisan hearing, the more than 400 page staff report will become an official committee report, and the blueprint for legislation to rein in the market power of the likes of Alphabet Inc’s Google, Apple Inc, Amazon.com and Facebook.

The report was approved by a 24-17 vote that split along party lines. The companies have denied any wrongdoing.

The report first released in October – the first such congressional review of the tech industry – suggested extensive changes to antitrust law and described dozens of instances where it said the companies had misused their power.

“Amazon, Apple, Google, and Facebook each hold monopoly power over significant sectors of our economy. This monopoly moment must end,” Cicilline said in a statement. “Now that the Judiciary Committee has formally adopted our findings, I look forward to crafting legislation that addresses the significant concerns we have raised.”

READ ALSO:

• Fans can’t stop admiring latest photo of Muntari’s son

• Massive reaction as Stonebwoy jets off to Las Vegas with Otchere-Darko [Photos]

• I was a party ‘animal’ but… Akufo-Addo’s daughter writes

The first bill has already been introduced. A bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers led by Cicilline and Senator Amy Klobuchar introduced legislation in March aimed at making it easier for news organizations to negotiate collectively with platforms like Google and Facebook.

Also in the Senate, Klobuchar introduced a broader bill in February aimed at strengthening antitrust enforcers’ ability to stop mergers by lowering the bar for stopping deals and increasing resources for enforcers.

The Cicilline report, whose origins were bipartisan, contained a menu of potential changes in antitrust law.

Suggestions ranged from the aggressive, such as potentially barring companies like Amazon.com from operating the markets in which they also compete, to the less controversial, like increasing the budgets of the agencies that enforce antitrust law – the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission.

The report also urged Congress to allow antitrust enforcers more leeway in stopping companies from purchasing potential rivals, something that is now difficult.

Splashing a screenshot on her Twitter page, she revealed she is worth more than $1 million to $5 million as estimated by the website.

SEE ALSO

• Wendy Shay drops new no-makeup photo; fans react

• John Dumelo: Covid-19 Virtual Concert pointless, totally needless

To her, the altering of her monetary value is a total disrespect and ordered for the post to be deleted with immediate effect.

However, netizens, who doubted her over GH¢ 28 million, (GH¢ 280 trillion old cedis ) claims, descended heavily on the musician for bragging about what she does not have.

People must opt in to the system, but it has the potential to monitor about a third of the world’s population.

The technology, known as contact-tracing, is designed to curb the spread of the novel coronavirus by telling users they should quarantine or isolate themselves after contact with an infected individual.

READ:

New Ebola case confirmed in the Democratic Republic of Congo

Kuami Eugene’s Tik Tok’ video with ‘girlfriend’ will make your day [Watch]

The Silicon Valley rivals said on Friday that they are building the technology into their iOS and Android operating systems in two steps. In mid-May, the companies will add the ability for iPhones and Android phones to wirelessly exchange anonymous information via apps run by public health authorities. The companies will also release frameworks for public health apps to manage the functionality.

This means that if a user tests positive for Covid-19, and adds that data to their public health app, users who they came into close proximity with over the previous several days will be notified of their contact. This period could be 14 days, but health agencies can set the time range.

The second step takes longer. In the coming months, both companies will add the technology directly into their operating systems so this contact-tracing software works without having to download an app. Users must opt in, but this approach means many more people can be included. Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android have about 3 billion users between them, over a third of the world’s population.

The pandemic has killed more than 100 000 and infected 1.63 million people. Governments have ordered millions to stay home, sending the global economy into a vicious tailspin. Pressure is building to relax these measures and get the world back to work. Contact-tracing is a key part of this because it can help authorities contain a potential resurgence of the virus as people resume regular activities.

ALSO:

Coronavirus: Superstars seem more ordinary now – Singer

Ghana records 30 new coronavirus cases, total up to 408

Still, this technology is controversial because it involves sharing sensitive health information from billions of people via mobile devices that are constantly broadcasting their location. Some politicians and regulators have been warning that citizens’ privacy should be protected.

Privacy

Apple and Google stressed on Friday that their system preserves users’ privacy.

Consent is required and location data is not collected. The technology also won’t notify users who they came into contact with, or where that happened.

The companies said they can’t see this data either, and noted that the whole system can be shut down when needed.

Aside from privacy and trust concerns, challenges include the availability of widespread and free testing to complement the app, as well as access to mobile phones and other wireless devices, according to the American Civil Liberties Union.

“Ghana to pay Google $400,000 yearly” – Why?

As per the news article, according to the Managing Director of Ghana Post, James Kwofie, the reason for paying such a huge fee is this:

“Ghana is to pay tech giant, Google, an amount of $400,000 every year for embedding the company’s online map into the country’s newly designed National Digital Property Addressing System, Ghana Post GPS.”

The GhanaPostGPS application, both in the browser and mobile apps embed a piece of code from Google, specifically, from their Maps platform, which allows you and I to locate our homes and generate our digital addresses.

However, the question is, does embedding this Google Maps API (Application Programming Interface) cost that much?

The Facts:

Google allows businesses, governments, big organizations and anyone making lots of use of their Google Maps API to pay a fee depending on how big their usage.

According to Google Maps API usage, if you’re using their API in your mobile application, either Android or iOS, here’s what applies:

“Default 1,000 free requests per day, increased to 150,000 free requests per day after identity verification. Free uplifts for complying applications.” [Source: https://developers.google.com/maps/pricing-and-plans/]

In short, if your application complies with proper use, and by a legitimate entity (which the GhanaPostGPS is, and the government of Ghana is), Google would allow for an almost unlimited amount of requests per day for their API.

From the look of the API use from above and on the Ghanapostgps website, the GPGPS team aren’t using any specialized, reserved premium option of the Google API.

In fact, what they’re using is JUST the same thing the tens of thousands of individual developers around the world could make use of, and of which we do use.

Therefore, Google is officially saying, YOU WON’T HAVE TO PAY TO USE THEIR API when used in a MOBILE application. So who or what at the GPS people paying the 400,000$ to yearly, and for what services?

For MOBILE use, it is literally free!

For use on a Website, here are what Google Maps says:

“Free up to 25,000 map loads per day.

$0.50 USD / 1,000 additional map loads, up to 100,000 daily, if billing is enabled.

Let’s do some maths then.

Let’s say, for whatever weird, impossible, and unexplainable supernatural reasons, the GhanaPostGPS website receives 100,000 daily requests, it will cost just (100,000 / 1,000) x 0.50$ = 50$ per day.

100,000 requests is a lot. In 24 hours, if an application receives 100,000 requests, then it means the GPS application on the web made precisely 69.4 requests per minute, which in turn is roughly a request per second.

Now if you think that’s remotely possible, it isn’t, because 100,000 requests simply means, 100,000 Ghanaians visited the web application once within 24 hours, or 50,000 Ghanaians visited the application twice, at different times afresh within the day. You get the point.

Fun fact: If you use Google’s Maps Embed API (as in the map from Google maps appears IN your website), the usage is UNLIMITED.

50,000 Ghanaians, visiting the web application within 24 hours? That I doubt would happen even within a year after launch or even for the next 5 years, because MANY of the users will be accessing the application from their mobile apps, and mobile app API requests, Google assures almost unlimited free use.

Now, at 50$ per day, let’s remotely assume it happened. The Web Application clocked 100,000 requests per day, that’s a total of 18,250$ per year (365 days).

Are you telling me, on a Sunday in Ghana, 100,000 people in Ghana would open a web browser JUST to see their address? Why the #*)@(*$) would anyone in their right mind do that on a Weekend, every weekend? It isn’t as if the application provides ANY value aside from giving one’s digital address.

Therefore, when your address is acquired, and probably you’ve written down somewhere or memorized, only government workers would be using the application for the most part. As an ordinary user, they get the address, use it to fill their form, and they’re done.

I wasn’t good at maths in school, but I’m not dumb enough to not realize 400,000$ is NOT equal to 18,250$, that’s 21x more than what Google would charge.

So who are the GPS people trying to deceive?

Here are the facts, I stand to be corrected. If any of the analysis above is invalid, I hope Google comes to clarify and set the records straight. The information, though, from their site is clear and makes absolutely sensible, and that’s how it’s been doing for a long time.

In reality, if there are any hidden charges I do not know of (which is highly very unlikely), I’ll give a benefit of a doubt, and say, the cost won’t exceed anything more than 50,000$ a year related to Google Maps API. That is even a bloated, unrealistic overestimation which isn’t right. But let’s assume that.

So, can the GPS people clarify what exactly was involved that meant they’re paying 400,000$?

I hope Google Ghana comes out to clarify, because that’s a horrible PR for them, and a big lie heaped against them, for something they don’t do.

The Government of Ghana has raised a huge accusation at Google, and unless Google doesn’t care their name being dragged through the mud they better come clean. Otherwise, before we realize, Ghana might come saying Google sold them a Google Chromebook for 20,000$ each.

So what do you think?

Backend, Firewalls, Hardware, Data Analytics and Indomie?

Ghanaians and jargons. Every opportunity we get, throwing dust in unsuspecting listeners eyes is a constant. Read this, also from the news article. For 2.5 million US dollars, here’s what they said they used the money for:

“In terms of the cost, what is being paid for is the back-end solution, data analytics, hardware i.e. the firewalls and servers, Google license, marketing and publicity as well as technical support, and GHc1.7 million VAT which goes back to the government. Contrary to popular belief, Google charges when you use their systems for local purposes or commercial activities. The Google license fee at the moment is $400,000 per year – that is the enterprise package,”

Lemme break the jargon down for you well well. In short, what they’re trying to say is, we wasted the money, and here are the facts

The Facts: Data Analytics

No! The GhanaPostGPS have not subscribed to the Google Analytics Premium nor the Adobe Analytics suites since they cost 150,000$ per year and 100,000$ per year respectively.

The question is, why buy a trailer truck, just to carry a shovel-full of sand? Would that make sense?

The free Google Analytics, which hundreds of thousands of businesses around the world use allows up to 5 million impressions per month.

That is a lot! Fortunately, none of the outlets of the GhanaPostGPS (mobile apps or via web) are going to blow over that limit, EVER! Even if that happens, there is NO NEED to jump to Premium.

Here’s the reason: https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/a/81102/56771

Thus, every sensible step by Google Analytics suggests there is NO NEED to subscribe to their premium model.

What analytics are the GPS people using? Is it Google Analytics? Did they truly spend money on buying a premium Analytics tool out there, or the word Analytics on the paper helped push the 2.5$m up to the limit?

The Fact: “Back-end solution … hardware i.e. the firewalls and servers”

Look at them!

The GhanaPostGPS web application is hosted on Amazon AWS. I do not know exactly what option of the countless solutions available on Amazon they’re using.

So I’ll make some assumptions based on my experience in deployments and realistic expectations with what costs.

With the highest tier of Amazon Lightsail option, which is 100$ a month, one can serve more than 1 million requests even a day depending on how your architecture your application. Is achieving a million requests a day with a 100$ tier possible?

I say this, because I’ve achieved a 50,000 requests per day, with a 5$ droplet (on DigitalOcean) with the specs, 512 RAM, 1CPU, with Nginx on the front-facing and caching enabled via proxy.

Yes, 50,000 requests per day with a 512 RAM and a single CPU. Unlike the GPS application which is just sending API JSON requests and receiving responses which are literally in kilobytes, the 50,000 requests that came in were to load web pages with images, videos and lots of text, each page weighing roughly 350-500 kilobytes per second.

Even with that, I got server response times of less than 5 seconds.

The crazy part of all is, this was achieved with some 4 more other applications running and serving websites on the SAME instance (Droplet).

Those who would understand what I just said would. If you don’t, just take the fact that, 100$ per month for a VPS is a LOT of server power, A LOT.

A big yes, especially with an application like GhanaPostGPS which when properly built, could utilize the most minimum of system resources.

Here’s what the 100$ gives us in terms of specs:

• 8 GB Memory

• 2 Core Processor

• 80 GB SSD Disk

• 5 TB Transfer

And if you think, ‘But Ah, 8 GB Memory is small’, it is, but for a server use, it is exponentially a lot, at least for serving a JSON response and requests.

With 8GB Memory, the GhanaPostGPS app could be run with almost the entire application data cached in memory using something like Redis Cache something similar.

The GhanaPostGPS uses Vuejs on the frontend, talking to an ASP.NET backend.

So let’s do some maths. There’s beyond reasonable stats that the GhanaPostGPS application can run on an 80$ tier monthly package, with even more space to spare to host other extra applications that might be needed.

100$ x 12 = 1200$

Let’s say because of debit card charges and whatnot, we are at 1,500$

That’s for 12 months. Just 1,500$

But wait! The GhanaPostGPS has 2 IP addresses. That would mean there’s some form of distributedness. Perhaps some load balancers or two web servers connected to a central Database running on a different third instance?

I do not know for sure. If that is even the case, and they unreasonably decided to use 100$ tier for all 3 instances (which shouldn’t be, why run Vue.js frontend on a 100$ box. Are you dumb?)

Lemme bloat the values up again on this one too. Server cost shouldn’t exceed 3,000$ each year for “Backend solution”.

And the “firewalls” whatever, Please the thing costs less than 10$ per month for a Web Application Firewall, and how many ACLs are needed for a mere Web application?

On my box, doing ACLs are even for free, as I’ve implemented them myself, using IPTables via UFW with some bans and whatever IP violations via Fail2Ban. These are features one usually doesn’t pay for. But if one does pay, they’re negligibly cheap, and hardly find a place on the invoice.

So mentioning Firewalls as if they cost a thing is ridiculous.

And do they hear themselves? You deployed a server, and you mention Firewalls as if it is an achievement. It is like Toyota releasing a Camry and saying, “We Added Seats and a Door handles”.

Obviously, that’s foolish, because a seat and a door aren’t extra features but part of the MVP (Minimum Viable Product)

‘We added firewalls’. Why were you guys thinking of not adding that? Geeesh!

I noticed they don’t have ICMP requests going through. Is that the Firewall added? And how much did that cost?

On the note of Server architecture, we’re looking at a not more than 30,000 US Dollars a year to keep it running. This is a very extreme high estimate. However, because we’re in Ghana, let’s assume that.

30,000 US Dollars for hosting a JSON-spewing application? Geesh.

Think about it.

Google Charges?

“Contrary to popular believe, Google charges when you use their systems for local purposes or commercial activities.”

Excuse my language, but the above statement is Bull****!

“Contrary to popular belief”, of who? “Local Purposes” – What is that supposed to mean?

Google, do you charge that much? I couldn’t figure that out on your official sites.

If so then how many companies and developers around the world are violating your terms of which ONLY Ghana is the smart one to be truthful and pay their tithes?

“Commercial activities”? Is the GhanaPostGPS Commercial? Is it?

Is the government going to sell our user Data elsewhere without our consent, perhaps to businesses within and outside the country? Should we be worried?

At this stage, if anyone from Google has read to this point, PLEASE, is it true it costs 400,000$ to use Google Maps API?

Ah, but Publicity Stunts?

I intentionally do not wanna touch on the part of the funds used for Marketing, because I’m No marketing person, and don’t know how much it cost to market a public, government application.

They say:

“An amount of GHc3.5 million was also spent on publicizing the system.”

3.5 million cedis, spent on publicizing the system? To who?

If Ghana spent 3.5 million cedis on Teenage pregnancy education, would our population not slow down in its current explosion?

I wonder what non-African countries we go to for funds would see us, considering we happily spend 3.5 million cedis “publicising the system”, that ONLY tells users, a digital address, which doesn’t put food on the user’s table, nor pays the school fees, nor lorry fares.

I leave the marketing whatever publicizing aspect to others. I only talk about what I know. I know ‘DevOps’, and that’s what I decided to touch on.

Concluding Thoughts

Please, if you’re like ‘Johnny Walker’, Hubtel’s Friend?, and firing up to come in the comments section to tell me how many employees Vodakom has, as well as my lack of “proper degree” whatever, and as such whatever they built is the “best” and “industry standard”, please stop.

Did I miss a point in the article? Did I say something which is wrong in the article? Was my analysis out of touch? Please let me know in the comments.

The amount is the regulator’s largest penalty to date against a company accused of distorting the market.

The ruling also orders Google to end its anti-competitive practices within 90 days or face a further penalty.

The US firm said it may appeal.

However, if it fails to change the way it operates the Shopping service within the three-month deadline, it could be forced to make payments of 5% of its parent company Alphabet’s average daily worldwide earnings.

Based on the company’s most recent financial report, that amounts to about $14m a day.

The commission said it was leaving it to Google to determine what alterations should be made to its Shopping service rather than specifying a remedy.

“What Google has done is illegal under EU antitrust rules,” declared Margrethe Vestager, the European Union’s Competition Commissioner.

“It has denied other companies the chance to compete on their merits and to innovate, and most importantly it has denied European consumers the benefits of competition, genuine choice and innovation.”

Ms Vestager added that the decision could now set a precedent that determines how she handles related complaints about the prominence Google gives to its own maps, flight price results and local business listings within its search tools.

Google had previously suggested that Amazon and eBay have more influence over the public’s spending habits and has again said it does not accept the claims made against it.

“When you shop online, you want to find the products you’re looking for quickly and easily,” a spokesman said in response to the ruling.

“And advertisers want to promote those same products. That’s why Google shows shopping ads, connecting our users with thousands of advertisers, large and small, in ways that are useful for both.

“We respectfully disagree with the conclusions announced today. We will review the Commission’s decision in detail as we consider an appeal, and we look forward to continuing to make our case.”
Fast growth

Google Shopping displays relevant products’ images and prices alongside the names of shops they are available from and review scores, if available.

The details are labelled as being “sponsored”, reflecting the fact that, unlike normal search results, they only include items that sellers have paid to appear.

On smartphones, the facility typically dominates “above-the-fold” content, meaning users might not see any traditional links unless they scroll down.

Google also benefits from the fact the Shopping service adverts are more visual than its text-based ads.

One recent study suggested Shopping accounts for 74% of all retail-related ads clicked on within Google Search results. However, the BBC understands Google’s own data indicates the true figure is smaller.
Seven-year probe

The European Commission has been investigating Google Shopping since late 2010.

The probe was spurred on by complaints from Microsoft, among others.

The rival tech giant has opted not to comment on the ruling, after the two struck a deal last year to try to avoid such legal battles in the future.

However, one of the other original complainants – the British price comparison service Foundem – welcomed the announcement.

“Although the record-breaking 2.42bn euro fine is likely to dominate the headlines, the prohibition of Google’s immensely harmful search manipulation practices is far more important,” said its chief executive Shivaun Raff.

“For well over a decade, Google’s search engine has played a decisive role in determining what most of us read, use and purchase online. Left unchecked, there are few limits to this gatekeeper power.”

Anthony Levandowski, previously worked on self-driving car technology at Waymo, owned by Alphabet.

He is accused of downloading 14,000 confidential files before leaving the company in 2016.

Uber denies it is using stolen technology.

In a court filing last month, Uber maintained its technology is different. It described the claim that employees brought files to Uber with the goal of creating “copycat” technology as “demonstrably false.”

Mr. Levandowski has declined to testify in the case, launched in February.

The firing was confirmed by an Uber spokeswoman, who said it was effective Tuesday.

Mr Levandowski had already been removed from working on the self-driving car technology at the heart of the suit.

He started working at Uber in August 2016, when the firm bought Otto, the self-driving truck start-up he had created in the six months after leaving Google.

He declined to testify earlier this year, citing his right to avoid self-incrimination.

Uber maintains its technology is different to Waymo’s and says there isn’t evidence the files are on its servers. But its search did not include Mr Levandowski’s computer.

Judge William Alsup, who is overseeing the case in San Francisco, earlier ordered Uber to return the thousands of “pilfered” files in question by the end of the month.

A spokeswoman for Uber said the firing occurred after Mr Levandowski failed to meet the deadline that would allow Uber to cooperate with the judge’s order.

Word of the firing was sent to employees on Tuesday.

Attorneys for Mr Levandowski could not be reached for comment immediately.

The Ghanaian entrepreneur and pioneer in microlending, who was born 98 years ago Tuesday, was the first person to start a formal food-processing business in West Africa’s Gold Coast.

To highlight Ocloo’s accomplishments, Google published a doodle Tuesday in her honour.

Ocloo made her livelihood selling marmalade and orange juice, but to expand production she needed a loan — a challenge for women with few economic resources.

Through persistence, she was able to secure a loan, allowing her to travel to England to learn the latest techniques in food processing.

After returning to Ghana, Ocloo taught local women those newfound skills, as well as everything she knew about starting and running a business, which she realized could improve the health and prosperity of the women and their communities alike.

Recognizing that banks often ignored low-income women because they lacked collateral, Ocloo in 1979 founded and became chairwoman of Women’s World Banking.

The nonprofit organization provides financial and technical assistance to low-income women around the world so they can reach their entrepreneurial goals.

Ocloo was also the first black person to earn a cooking diploma from the Goodhousekeeping Institute in London.

She died in 2002 at the age of 82 after a bout with pneumonia.

Google and other major tech firms have come under pressure over their tax arrangements.

The firm paid about £25m in UK tax last year, but said it expected to make a further payment of about £12m.

Google’s accounts also showed it hired an extra 600 workers to take its UK workforce to nearly 3,000 last year.

A Google spokesman said: “As an international business, we pay the majority of our taxes in our home country, as well as all the taxes due in the UK.

“We have recently announced significant new investment in the UK, including new offices in Kings Cross for 7,000 staff.”

Google agreed to pay £130m in back taxes to the UK last year, which was widely criticised as too lenient.

George Osborne, who was chancellor at the time, described the deal as a “victory”, while Labour’s John McDonnell said the sums were “trivial”.

source: bbc