Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Congress is going to throw the kitchen sink at big tech

bigtechnology.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 343 posts

Re: Congress is going to throw the kitchen sink at big tech

#161

Post by dalbasal »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #148
dalbasal wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FB is somewhat of an odd man out... I certainly think reversing acquisitions would be a positive, but... With Bell, standard oil and past monopolies... the goal was to decentralise while keeping oil and telecom viable. We wanted what they made, and didn't want disruptions. Do we want what FB makes? Is it scarce? I feel like we would have a sufficient supply of likes, shares, messages and posts regardless. There doesn…

Facebook the website and Facebook the advertising giant are kinda different things though. By which I mean that Facebook does not make $trn by supplying likes shares messages and posts.

Perhaps. anchor it wherever you feel it should be anchored, and ask the same question. Whatever it is that FB does isn't scarce.

We would also not lack for ways of selling whatever advertisers on FB are selling. They would be different without FB. Different parties would or wouldn't benefit... Connecting consumers to businesses is not scarce.

Re: Congress is going to throw the kitchen sink at big tech

#162

Post by majormajor »

wintermutestwin wrote: post #147
ethbr0 wrote: post #54

I've come around and landed more on the opinion that we're now enabling our jailors. Light tech regulation was exactly the correct approach in the 1990s (and arguably the 2000s). It enabled mind-boggling rapid and stunning innovation. ... However, the massive corporate fortunes built by the winners of those times are now primarily enabling rent seeking. Google and Facebook's other work is interesting in the same way…

Haven't we learned that the "break 'em up" fix for monopolies doesn't achieve the desired results? Why not simply get our government to do their jobs and REGULATE away practices that are not in the public's interest?

> Haven't we learned that the "break 'em up" fix for monopolies doesn't achieve the desired results?

What do you think are failed examples of this?

Even though you had eventual re-consolidation, the post-breakup phone industry seemed like a much more interesting and competitive place than the one before it. The fix for re-consolidation, of course, could be pretty simple...

Very few people want to do the harder, more innovative, more interesting thing if they can make a comfortable living doing what they've always done. This applies to regulators as much as to companies. We haven't found any better tool to force companies to be in touch with their customers and do what the customers want than competition, but we also have an economic system that encourages consolidation (because competition is HARD!). So the role of government to break things back up to keep competitive incentives feels quite natural. The market isn't gonna do it itself.

Re: Congress is going to throw the kitchen sink at big tech

#163

Post by crazygringo »

I can see some app store regulation coming (which will have minimal impact on big tech's profits), but there just isn't enough political support for breaking up America's success-story companies. It's not gonna happen.

But part of me wonders, if it did -- might the broken-up companies turn out to be more valuable in aggregate than the original ones? Remember, when the gov't split up AT&T that's exactly what happened.

Re: Congress is going to throw the kitchen sink at big tech

#164

Post by Jcowell »

bogwog wrote: post #131
tschellenbach wrote: post #48

I spoke to a commission of congressman about this topic. (they wanted to talk to small startups). It seems really difficult to effectively regulate this. - acquisitions are part of what make the startup ecosystem work. It's not at all clear which acquisitions you should block - the bundling approach that google uses makes things like android free - you dont want apps on iOS and android running their own payment infra…

> acquisitions are part of what make the startup ecosystem work. That's such BS. A startup whose only business plan is to get acquired doesn't deserve to succeed in a competitive market. If that route becomes nonviable and a bunch of silicon valley startups go under, then good riddance. The US economy needs startups with sustainable business practices and highly competitive products and services. Not acquihire scheme…

My question is why not ? If it’s something thriving in the competitive market why should it not be allowed to succeed ?

Re: Congress is going to throw the kitchen sink at big tech

#165

Post by danShumway »

wintermutestwin wrote: post #147
ethbr0 wrote: post #54

I've come around and landed more on the opinion that we're now enabling our jailors. Light tech regulation was exactly the correct approach in the 1990s (and arguably the 2000s). It enabled mind-boggling rapid and stunning innovation. ... However, the massive corporate fortunes built by the winners of those times are now primarily enabling rent seeking. Google and Facebook's other work is interesting in the same way…

Haven't we learned that the "break 'em up" fix for monopolies doesn't achieve the desired results? Why not simply get our government to do their jobs and REGULATE away practices that are not in the public's interest?

> Haven't we learned that the "break 'em up" fix for monopolies doesn't achieve the desired results?

Breaking up has achieved excellent results before, as far as I can tell. It's not a permanent solution to the problem, but neither is brushing my teeth.

It might be OK to have a process that needs to be periodically repeated when companies get out of control. It might even be preferable to large legislative efforts that significantly change what companies can and can't do. Are people really mad that maps show up in Google search, or are people mad that Google owns the world? I'm not sure, but maybe it's better to precisely target a temporary solution at the actual problem.

In general, I'm more on board with bills about vertical integration than I am with some other solutions people have proposed. But I'm also not necessarily opposed to skipping the whole thing and directly breaking up those companies instead. It seems to have had good effects in the past. And while I do think vertical integration is a problem, I'm not 100% certain that it's the biggest problem or that this is the best solution. I'm watching these bills kind of carefully.

Re: Congress is going to throw the kitchen sink at big tech

#166

Post by Dracophoenix »

chrisdhoover wrote: post #152
dreamcompiler wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need to be careful about breakups to prevent re-agglomeration. Although AT&T was broken up, the Baby Bells eventually merged back together again while nobody was looking. The winner was Southwestern Bell, which later renamed itself to AT&T. The AT&T we know today is really just Southwestern Bell with a new name. Fortunately they have competitors but not very many.

Thats true but interregnum period between the old bell and the new bell brought us a great deal of innovation and positive changes to communications.

I wouldn't say that's because of Ma Bell's. More like in spite of it.

Re: Congress is going to throw the kitchen sink at big tech

#167

Post by danShumway »

skak wrote: post #71
ethbr0 wrote: post #54

I've come around and landed more on the opinion that we're now enabling our jailors. Light tech regulation was exactly the correct approach in the 1990s (and arguably the 2000s). It enabled mind-boggling rapid and stunning innovation. ... However, the massive corporate fortunes built by the winners of those times are now primarily enabling rent seeking. Google and Facebook's other work is interesting in the same way…

How do you (and most other people, especially Americans) not realize how unrealistic this is? It’s such a common refrain to say “break `em up!” but it seems as if nobody stops to question why it never happens despite it’s popularity... These corporations control the government because the same people demanding to “break `em up!” have also been demanding “small government!” for decades on end, which in practice simply…

> These corporations control the government

So proposing these bills is more feasible, because... why exactly? Are you under the impression that corporations aren't allowed to lobby about bills?

What makes you think that legislating tech will be easier than breaking tech up? Complicated rules about vertical integration aren't going to be less susceptible to lobbying and corporate FUD.

Re: Congress is going to throw the kitchen sink at big tech

#169

Post by unionpivo »

fallingknife wrote: post #106
lovich wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What other industry treats its workers better than tech? There's a bit of a disconnect between what a FAANG company considers an employee and what the colloquial definition of employees are at a company. The large corporations have shed every worker they can that's unrelated to their core business, such as by contracting out security or cleaning. Then the large corporations say they treat their employees better and…

Yes, but that happens in every industry, and this is about why the left hates tech in particular.

Because tech is very good at it.¸

There is a reason why a lot of people consider uber and other similar business tech, even though their core business is not tech.

Re: Congress is going to throw the kitchen sink at big tech

#170

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

fhrow4484 wrote: post #4

> Jeff Bezos, this one’s for you. This provision aims at Amazon’s practice of using data it collects from third-party merchants to enhance its own private label offerings. If it passes, the practice would be blatantly illegal. Would it equally apply to physical stores like Safeway, Kroger, Costco's private labels like "Private Selection", "Simple Truth", "Kirkland", ... What makes Amazon different in this regard? Is…

This tired take is in every single thread.
Post reply on HN