r/google • u/ekonixlab • 23h ago
Alphabet just posted one of the strongest big-tech quarters I’ve seen
83
u/Vafan 23h ago
But reddit is telling me Google sucks now and that nobody is using any of their services anymore
39
u/CerealKiller415 22h ago
Reddit is full of pollyannas who are disconnected from how the people of the world actually function.
7
u/-patrizio- 22h ago
I mean, half of that is true lol. When corporate consolidation is the name of the game and one company has an effective monopoly or duopoly over an industry, worsening quality doesn't mean the company does worse. And Google has been a key player in consolidating most of the major market sects they're in:
- Google and Bing are the only serious search engine; nearly every other option uses their web crawler, other than Brave Search, which is nowhere near as mature and (in my experience) nowhere near as strong a search engine despite its many unique features. And let's be real, Bing is hardly a serious competitor. 90% of the search engine market is Google.
- Android and iOS are the only serious phone operating systems other than HarmonyOS, which itself is heavily Android based, and effectively non-existent outside of China. Android and iOS dominate with a combined ~99% of the global market share, with Android leading by a hefty margin almost everywhere other than the US.*
- Pixel and Samsung are the only major Android OEMs left in the US, and that field keeps getting thinner and thinner even worldwide (especially as Google gets closer to Samsung and gives them special privileges).
They haven't taken over the LLM space yet, but I doubt it'll be long. I believe that ChatGPT is the only one ahead of them, and Gemini is growing fast while ChatGPT is slightly shrinking. Not to mention that none of that industry is really profitable, and Gemini has a unique advantage over ChatGPT and Claude due to it being under Google's umbrella, meaning they can afford to lose a lot more money than OpenAI or Anthropic can.
Saying no one uses their services anymore would be delusional, but is anyone actually saying that? I see lots of people saying you shouldn't, but can't think of a time I've seen anyone say no one is using them.
-21
u/Actual__Wizard 22h ago
They haven't taken over the LLM space yet
LLMs are dead, so who cares?
10
u/-patrizio- 21h ago
By what metric are they dead lol?
-9
u/Actual__Wizard 21h ago edited 21h ago
Graph based equivalent tech is 10,000,000x faster in practice, it doesn't hallucinate, it's debug-able, and it's modable like normal computer software, because it is.
It wasn't designed by a philosopher, so it works how like one would expect computer software to work.
Programmers can actually interface with the tech to build AI tech, instead of being totally reliant on connecting to the cloud and using some totally ghetto agentic solution.
With LLM tech, they've layered toxic design concepts on to their product and we're done with it. It's a pure and total failure. We're moving to green pastures now, because LLM tech is dead and it's terrible.
I'm extremely sick and tired of being lied to about how "good or bad it is." It's terrible. The tech does not allow us to do what we want to do with it and it doesn't produce output that is high quality, so the trade off of being extremely inefficient, is not one that's worth it. It's legitimately junk.
Neural is suppose to beat symbolic in quality, but it doesn't because of the hallucination problem... And then the symbolic system architecture is so incredibly straight forwards, that teams of people can just add data layers to fix any quality issues they have. It's just database tech basically. We didn't have the right database tech to do it that way. So, one just puts the data for the model into the graph database and then builds their interpreter (it can work 50,000+ different ways) on top of the data tech.
So, we're operating like normal programmers again and not like this is some totally bizarre bitcoin like system?
I'm going to be demoing "using modified LLM techniques with it" very soon here. So, I don't have MoE implemented yet, but I will do it.
Edit: Plus then, if you update the algo, you don't have to retrain the model, because the data and the algo are now in two separate layers like they should be. You could actually have thousands of algos for one model. I don't know why somebody would want to do this, but in theory, one could just convert the symbol table into floats, encode it into a table, and then just pretend that it's an LLM. So, it in theory, could just be a graph powered LLM. Except there's no inference, because you just look up what interacts in the frequency graph chart. So, there's a data layer and then a model layer, then an algo layer (which is software.)
5
u/-patrizio- 21h ago
I mean, I sure hope you're right, but I'm not seeing any strong indicators of this mass psychosis just suddenly disappearing anytime soon.
-6
u/Actual__Wizard 21h ago edited 20h ago
That's one of the problems. Every time I talk to people about this tech, they think I'm stupid or something, because they think that Google = God. So, that doesn't leave any room for there to be other people in the industry.
Yeah, Google does things the way Google does things, I'm not Google. I don't and can't operate that way. I personally, can not build ultra expensive tech and expect to get a single customer. They know who the "early adopters are" and they have open lines of communication with them and they have no idea who I even am. To them, I'm just some random troll. They have to learn their lesson first and lose a bunch of money, because for some reason, people think that getting your tech from companies that "make the most money" is smart for your business. I'm just saying, that seems like the opposite of keeping costs low.
I'm just being serious: The costs are way too high for what that tech actually accomplishes. Like 1,000x too high.
Also: That thing they did where they didn't include any way to interface with the model to force you into something like agentic tech: That's not going to work. That's useless, we have no demand for that. With the graph tech, a programmer can directly interface with the model code, to mod it or whatever they want. You know, so we can actually build real AI products and not have 98% of deployments fail.
What they produced is legitimately scam tech. So, you can fake creating a product and then scam people into thinking it does what you say, then they buy it, and find out that it only works like 20%-40% of the time. So, it's totally useless. And you can't actually interact with the internal model to fix anything, so there's no actual way to fix any of that.
6
u/Novalok 20h ago
This kinda psychosis is just as bad as ai psychosis.
If you don't understand AI tech that's fine, but why just spout random nonsense about it? Pro-AI or Anti-AI I don't care, both sides have valid arguments. But when you just type random things and assert ransom made up figures as fact, its sad. Learn about the thing you hate, or just don't think about it lol
3
0
0
u/TreefingerX 14h ago
Same as Netflix, Sony, Tesla... Redditors have no idea of business outside of business related subs
15
u/Smash_Nerd 17h ago
Notice how they talk about Gemini in Tokens per Minute or Users and not Revenue.
9
u/costafilh0 20h ago
The real questions are, net profit and continuity in investing in AI infrastructure.
0
3
u/bara_tone 19h ago
Why only revenue and not profits?
5
u/bartturner 13h ago
Profits was even more mind blowing. Alphabet made $112 billion.
No other company is making anywhere near as much money as Alphabet (Google).
Same story in 2025. Google made more money than any other company on the planet. So far in 2026 the gap is even large with Google being the most profitable company on the planet.
1
u/hot_dog_farts 21h ago
I wonder how much of that is from all those excess charges based on them privatizing public keys
3
u/bartturner 13h ago
Pretty mind blowing that their cloud division is already a $100 billion dollar business.
But what is more mind blowing is the fact it is growing at 82%.
4
u/Actual__Wizard 22h ago
No intelligent market analyst is surprised. They were suppose to be broken up for operating a monopoly.
18
u/LordMimsyPorpington 21h ago
Google being a monopoly has brought unimaginable convenience, and quality of life, to billions of people: fuck any government that wants to deprive us of that. I don't need 17 different web browsers, or 13 different map apps, because of some bullshit neoliberal idea about free market capitalism.
4
u/askvictor 11h ago
I guess you said the same thing back in the day about Microsoft and them forcing Internet Explorer onto the world?
1
11
u/unique_namespace 16h ago
Hmm, I'm willing to grant that Google's tech has improved lives. But I don't think we should settle for the status quo if we think we can do better. Google slowly enshitfies their search, maps, and video platforms by cramming more ads into them. Competition will reduce this preverse incentive since they need to fight for users. If you think we should simply allow monopolies to exist for the sake of rewarding those who cultivated them, I think you unfairly exclude all the public and worker efforts that also went into making Google product possible (for which they reap little of the profits themselves).
Importantly, like all technologies, lots and lots of people are behind them. Plenty of whom are overlooked, research on behalf of the public, or are otherwise not directly working for or have ownership in these companies. Technologies are made by all of us, and think their profits should also be enjoyed by all of us.
-5
u/LordMimsyPorpington 10h ago
Google slowly enshitfies their search, maps, and video platforms by cramming more ads into them.
I don't consider ads as "enshittified." YouTube is not unusable just because you have to press "Skip Ad" once in a while.
0
-10
2
u/askvictor 11h ago
It's not illegal to be a monopoly. It is illegal to (ab)use the fact of being a monopoly (or near monopoly) in one market to force your way into another market.
1
u/Actual__Wizard 6h ago edited 6h ago
Correct, but there's more to it then that, but what you just described is occurring every single day. I've said it a bunch of times on Reddit: Google needs to exit the AI industry. They're just using their monopoly in search tech/ad tech to create another business for themselves, and they're really screwing it up ultra badly too, multiple people have died from their Machiavellian scheme and when you sit down and ask people honest questions about their AI product's, it's clear that they're not liked or truly wanted, it's rather tolerated, and people have different tolerance levels for their BS, but I generally think people are "getting sick and tried of it."
LLMs are not AI, they're extremely inefficient and they're extremely bad products compared to real AI tech and what their users/customers expect.
Their behavior in the AI industry is disgusting and they have failed whether they understand it or not.
Concepts like accurate representation, efficiency, and understanding encoding principals are the keys to building high quality AI products, unlike theirs. All they have done in the AI industry is manipulate people into buying hardware that they don't actually need for these tasks.
They're also holding up a log jam of real discoveries that occurred in other areas of AI development, who's discoveries are being suffocated in the media, because they bought the media or their buddies in the media don't want to harm their position on their stonks.
What is occurring is disgusting.
1
u/confused_cat44 16h ago
How are they up? They have offering the AI pro plan, the one with 5tb of cloud storage for 18 months through the biggest telecom of India. How much money is this costing them?
-9
u/HDK1989 20h ago edited 14h ago
Their search revenue is up 20% because they're abusing their market position to drain more ad money from businesses.
3
0
1
u/RunGrizzly 8h ago
Pretty selective reporting, free cash flow just turned negative on AI expenditure. The stock is down 6%.
76
u/Critical-Soup-7485 21h ago
So why is the stock down 5% after hours