What incentive is there for states to sue over monopolies? Is it simply to advocate for their constituencies?
[deleted]
U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google
231–240 of 261 posts
Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
Costco, Target and Walmart all have their own online presence. Your entire argument makes no sense.
They were obviously just using an analogy with real names to say Amazon does not have a similar-size competitor or three.
Walmart is a similar sized competitor, though. Depending on how you break it down, eBay is as well. The analogy makes no sense. Walmart is a competitor, Aliexpress, Flipkart, etc.
Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who's been involved in developing financial exchanges this concept is bizarre. There is regulation and participant agreements that would prevent NYSE for example from running its own market making firm and abusing it's position as exchange to benefit over other participants for profit, if it did this others would leave and the exchange would eventually die.
The notion of: "it's a little bit like X, a little bit like Y - but it's neither X nor Y, therefore we it's a wild-west anarchy without any rules or regulations" - this is such a glaring loophole in our legal system that it must be intentional. Derivatives bubble, ad-tech, gig-work, crypto-mania, AirBnB, and many other socially-parasitic enterprises exist solely because our legal code is missing "try-catch-finally" c…
They didn't have any trouble during the drug war when new variations were made because they weren't illegal -- the government made all variants illegal and continued on. That's what they do when they care. When they don't care they pretend there's nothing they can do.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Analogue_Act
> ...any chemical "substantially similar" to a controlled substance listed in Schedule I or II to be treated as if it were listed in Schedule I
Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
(Not a Google engineer) Google's engineers are notoriously loose-lipped (which is a good thing!!!). There's no way they would be able to keep a secret like this. Anytime a customer's private data gets accessed, you either a) need approval by someone or b) "break the glass", which is only reserved for oncall fires. Either way, it gets audited. The only way I would believe something like this is if an executive/higher…
So Google has all the "checks&balances" in place, and corporate managed to turn them into a flawless and perfect system? And the source for that claim is not even a Google engineer, but apparently somebody who heard how Google engineers are "notoriously loose-lipped". From which loose-lipped Google engineer did you get that information about "needing approval", "breaking glass" and "audits"? > The only way I would be…
[I work at Google]
Your first link explains how Google doesn't actually give your data to anyone else. Your second link is about a company that Google Ventures invested in. The equivalent would be that some company claims a YC-backed startup stole some of their IP, and that somehow YC is at fault, which is silly. Google isn't even a party to the lawsuit (further, it's not clear that the company who sued even won and to an extent it looks like they might be a patent troll).
> From which loose-lipped Google engineer did you get that information about "needing approval", "breaking glass" and "audits"?
A bunch of it is public: https://cloud.google.com/access-transparency. Access Transparency provides the access logs to the customer, and Access Approvals allows a cloud customer to prevent Google from accessing their data without approval from the company. But yes, you could also go searching HN for discussion of these topics and probably find quite a lot from people.
Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, this is the crucial difference Brick and mortar stores are dealers, Amazon is a broker. Dealers have inventories - they purchase items from the suppliers and resell them - if they misjudge demand, they're left off with useless goods. Brokers simply facilitate a transaction between two parties - there's no risk involved. The fact that brokers get to charge a higher mark-up than dealers is just bizarre
The major brick and mortar stores are not solely dealers, they often have various deals where they sell items on consignment and do not pay for inventory until after they're sold, require payment for "shelf space", etc. That's transparent from a customer perspective, but from a supplier viewpoint they're often quite close to brokers in practice.
The consignment model and paying for shelf space are the exception in retail though, not the rule.
They tend to exist only where there is a huge asymmetry in power between retailer (usually large chains) and suppliers.
Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google
#236Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at how the Notes app has evolved… There are apps for scanning documents, for example which are now superseded. The Music app which now has a streaming service…
Spotify is still in the App Store, and iTunes/Apple Music existed long before Spotify.
Spotify launched in 2006. Apple Music: 2015.
iTunes is not a subscription service like Spotify.
Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
The major brick and mortar stores are not solely dealers, they often have various deals where they sell items on consignment and do not pay for inventory until after they're sold, require payment for "shelf space", etc. That's transparent from a customer perspective, but from a supplier viewpoint they're often quite close to brokers in practice.
The consignment model and paying for shelf space are the exception in retail though, not the rule. They tend to exist only where there is a huge asymmetry in power between retailer (usually large chains) and suppliers.
Isn't most of retail done by large chains with a huge asymmetry in power?
Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
They were obviously just using an analogy with real names to say Amazon does not have a similar-size competitor or three.
Walmart is a similar sized competitor, though. Depending on how you break it down, eBay is as well. The analogy makes no sense. Walmart is a competitor, Aliexpress, Flipkart, etc.
What percentage of online revenue does Walmart make? How much does Amazon make?
Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google
#239As more data comes out about Google, Apple, Amazon, one simple underlying thing becomes clear: a single company cannot be trusted to operate a marketplace while also being a participant . Apple's App Store insider knowledge lets them discover popular apps, then boot them off the platform when they decide to compete. Amazon sees what products are successful and profitable, then makes knock-offs which they promote over…
Yes but. It's your country, you let them do these things. You set up your country to let them do these things. So no real reason to complain.
That's not logical. Our country isn't a monolith. Lots of us are fighting for change so stop acting like 330 million people are all the same would be a great start. Complaints are one point of contention. Currently most people don't care much about their privacy if they find out it will slightly inconvenience them to try out an alternative. Until they get burned or FAANG does something particularly aggregious they just don't care much.
Re: U.S. states file updated antitrust complaint against Google
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
Walmart is a similar sized competitor, though. Depending on how you break it down, eBay is as well. The analogy makes no sense. Walmart is a competitor, Aliexpress, Flipkart, etc.
What percentage of online revenue does Walmart make? How much does Amazon make?
7% vs 40%. Definitely a huge difference, but the majority of commerce in the USA is non-Amazon. If you do worldwide it's way worse.
in no way is it a "monopoly." If you look at growth rates Amazon is slowing and others are gaining
not to mention the comparison is foolish to begin with as Amazon doesn't have physical locations. a better comparison is total amount of sales, in which Amazon isn't even the plurality.