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

It's not a crime if we do it with an app

pluralistic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 640 posts

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#51

Post by dataflow »

I can't say I buy this argument? I think for some of the cases (like Uber?) it might be correct, but are they sure there isn't another force at play in a lot of other cases?

I recall reading that with apartment rentals in NYC, the problem was (is?) apparently that there are literally contracts in place preventing landlords from deviating from the recommendation. That's the crux of the problem, not the app recommendation itself.

Are we sure the causes in these cases aren't analogously different? For example, the part about 97% of a market being controlled by one company sounds like a monopolization issue rather than anything to do with an app.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#52

Post by pseudalopex »

hermannj314 wrote: post #32

This is the way our world works. If you steal a potato, you will be arrested immediately and the case will be resolved in a few weeks or months. If you illegally fix the price of potatoes and steal billions from the market, you will be allowed to operate for years in the open while a lengthy civil procedure eventually may ask you to give 1 or 2% of what you stole back in fines. Don't blame the potato theives or potat…

> Don't blame the potato theives or potato cartels, blame the politicians that built the system to work this way.

Blame both.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#53

Post by llamaimperative »

method_capital wrote: post #36
Eextra953 wrote: post #23

Does anybody know whats stopping ethical and slightly less greedy companies from outcompeting these conglomerates? Its a question I keep coming back to because if the market were efficient then competitors should be able to use that same data to undercut big potato (or big whatever). This never seems to happen.

The answer is: nothing. The whole argument is predicated on a political conviction, not an economic reality.

You don’t think massive conglomerates have additional advantages they can deploy against competitors in order to retain their cartels?

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#54

Post by cluckindan »

serf wrote: post #26
wongarsu wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What rules did Craigslist, eBay or the Ford Model T break? Craigslist seems like a straightforward digital version of what newspapers and community boards were doing for a long time. eBay is just a digital version of an auction house. And the Model T was just a cheaper more widely available car compared to the cars that came before. None of them seem comparable to AirBnB (subverting hotel regulations by pretending to…

craigslist served as a prostitution and drug trafficking forum for most of its' popular existence. ebay used to allow the sale of presription drugs, prescriptions themselves, body parts , animal cadavers , pirated software, and shipping of weapons to restricted global areas. ebay was also an unreported tax-haven-ish thing for a few early years. (ebay was great fun to browse around in the mid 90s.) the production of t…

Did you ever read the personals section of a broadsheet newspaper?

Because it was the same thing.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#56

Post by llamaimperative »

miohtama wrote: post #50
method_capital wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is: nothing. The whole argument is predicated on a political conviction, not an economic reality.

Only argument I can think of is economics of scale. You need to have sufficient mass to enter the markets. However even in this case customers, or Big Potato buyers, can simply ally and create a new supplier where they are shareholders.

Correct, which is why they agglomerated in the first place. Sectors where you see lots of agglomeration are ones where there are significant advantages to agglomeration.

And yeah, it’s hard to do once, but obviously it’s dramatically harder to do after someone has already done it.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#57

Post by miohtama »

istultus wrote: post #40

It really does suck that US companies have belatedly figured out that demand is elastic and jacked up the prices. Where I live that happened long ago. The thing is that he doesn't present any alternative. I know he's some variant of a communist, so does he suggest government control for everything? As if that solved anything? I guess what you find on empty market shelves is cheaper. Truly a question - what's your sol…

Pepsi and Coke issue has been solved as there are multiple cola brands with store label or no label. You can buy cheaper cola and you do not need to buy Coke/Pepsi.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#58

Post by davidw »

marcosdumay wrote: post #38
tripplyons wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was illegal about Neflix, YouTube, and Tesla at first?

Youtube got a lot of users by not fighting piracy. And Tesla had that thing where direct sales were illegal in the US. I don't know about Netflix.

Leaving aside Tesla, banning direct sales is a boon to local car dealerships, who often fund some very reactionary local politics.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#59

Post by alt227 »

maiar wrote: post #42
ryandrake wrote: post #17

More like "It's not a crime if a corporation does it." The US treats corporations with kid gloves. They get away with so much, and in those rare cases where a regulatory body does anything , it's often just a strongly worded letter, a warning, a threat to one day send a strongly worded letter, or, in really rare, extreme cases, a company official gets called in to say a few words in front of Congress. Nobody goes to…

This. The entire point of corporations is to shield individuals from penalties, but they don’t work. Business failure in good faith, where the shielding makes sense, is not really protected because bank loans require personal liability and because it’s impossible these days to recover from a damaged reputation unless you come from a family rich enough to hire its own PR firm. On the other hand, when it comes to letti…

I get the feeling this was the plan from begining.
Post reply on HN