Is that it? Read the first sentence and ignore everything else? Will you address what I said on the rest of it? How they have all other services splitting the use of their infrastructure.

I pointed out your obvious error that "Google is the number 1 company in all relating video streaming". What more do you want?

"they have google the number one search engine." - Yes they do. What has that to do in a discussion about cloud services and cloud based video streaming?

"they control like 80% of all online adds." - What has that to do in a discussion about cloud services and cloud based video streaming?

"They are already dominating the internet infrastructure." - Depends on the context. If we are talking about search engines, then yes. If we are talking about online shopping, then Amazon is dominating  the internet infrastructure. If we are talking about other aspects of the internet infrastructure, then Microsoft or Apple will be on top. If we are talking about cloud services, Azure, AWS and Google Cloud all have their advantages and disadvantages.

I would not doubt that they have the best server farms already in the market, just that they already split it into so many services that they offer. - Based on what? On your gut feeling? Microsoft and Amazon also "split into so many services that they offer".

Should be clear, google is the only company that is almost 100% based around internet infrastructures and services. Could they still be second to another is probable, but even without any more info just basing it on what the companies do I would bet on google having the net biggest.

You want government to legislate video game distribution?  I can't think of a worse thing that could happen to gaming.  

Update:

"Bethesda Softworks, a maker of many popular titles such as the DOOM, Fallout, Wolfenstein, and The Elder Scrolls series, has decided to pull a big part of its game library from the NVIDIA GeForce NOW game streaming service. In another surprising turn of events, a part of NVIDIA staff announced that Bethesda Softworks will pull most of its games form the GeForce NOW platform, excluding Wolfenstein Youngblood, which will remain playable to give users a chance to experience it with "RTX on". "


First Activision Blizzard games, and almost all Bethesda games.... Wouldnt be surprised if even more join in and do simular.

source :  https://www.techpowerup.com/264156/bethesda-removes-games-from-geforce-now-game-streaming-service

I love how the industry is killing streaming faster than the market itself. This is just like tv streaming, only when the chips go down, there will be only a couple of big streaming services left alive. Gaming is not allowing a single streaming service to prosper to that point, so the entire concept will die before it even takes root.

Seems this industry doesn't want middle-men anymore. Always now and forever got to be about getting a far better deal than the middle-man, or 100% of it all by themselves. Thank god they are all shooting themselves in the foot with this bs, and because the media Streaming service is suffering a piracy increase (fragmentation isn't always a great thing for everyone), I expect the fragmentation of the games streaming side is going to suffer just as bad. 

Greed sure is a fast killer to all roots. 

making a service based on games Nvidia have no license to use was always going to backfire.

This reminds me of the whole PC market debacle in the early 00s which lead to the EA/Valve rivalry where EA wrote off the PC market only for Valve to take their gamble with HL2 to push Steam and become the de facto platform for all PC games to be sold on a position that had EA envious to the point they pulled their games from Steam to create and push Origins in an attempt to cut out the middle man only for a double humiliation where courts ruled that Steam users who had already purchased their games should retain access to them and EA to eventually come back to Steam with their tail between their legs.

Exactly. EA didn't want to have to also sell, they wanted to become the de facto market leader, and we still see this from others to this day. Look at EG for example. They don't want to compete, so they sign exclusivity deals, so rather than seeing if their store pans out on it's own, they'd rather take a stranglehold via deals. Imagine once everyone lowers their cut, after EG has had it for a few, only for them to raise their own and watch everyone suffer. it'd be one killer of a strategy, but an underhanded one (even they know it's not something they can do indefinitely). 

I imagine Ubisoft will come back in time. Look at CDP reaching Ubi's level, and they pump out less titles, have far less staff and they run a much smaller storefront (smaller as in traction and earnings), yet GoG is gaining something that Uplay isn't, and CDP is also offering a new alternative via their all in one Galaxy 2.0, allowing us to play all clients by using their optional one.

The idea that the middle-man shouldn't exist is definitely going to be a far harsher lesson for the big fish to learn, once the waters clear and everyone has chosen a side. There should always be a middle-man for something, as we cannot entirely just cut them all out and keep them barred forever.