Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

Post by thr_w » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 3:47 PM UTC

treis wrote: post #49

chadmhorner wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the general theory is that if we allow them to continue getting bigger and swallowing up all potential competitors, we’re basically saying these four or five companies will run everything, forever.

I think that wildly overstates the influence these companies have. Amazon is trivial to avoid. Just don't shop there or at Whole Foods. Facebook is a bit trickier because you might be forced there by a social group and they have a huge web of trackers. Google is really the issue. They are dominant in search, browser, and maps, and they're half the mobile duopoly. It's very difficult to avoid using their products enti…

Post by isoskeles » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 3:48 PM UTC

geofft wrote: post #58

This is an excellent goal, and Paul Graham has articulated the reasoning pretty clearly: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/886953410356011008 > Here's how to explain to people the distinction between fighting poverty and fighting economic inequality. If you're fighting poverty, you might say "Let's have universal health care." If you're fighting economic inequality, you have to say "Let's have universal health care. A…

Post by velcrovan » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 3:48 PM UTC

basch wrote: post #124

velcrovan wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a case for splitting Amazon and AWS. The point of anti-trust laws is to break up monopolies because they represent a massive and dangerous concentration of market and political power in the hands of the few. You don't need evidence of any specific crime to do it. You can say you'd prefer it not be that way. But it's a provision of existing law, with precedents. To really argue for your preference you'd need…

Facebook should be treated the same way and spit up vertically then, not horizontally. Datacenter and infrastructure and all their low level services should be split from client apps, NOT messenger split from whatsapp.

Post by geofft » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 3:49 PM UTC

sooheon wrote: post #126

geofft wrote: post #58

This is an excellent goal, and Paul Graham has articulated the reasoning pretty clearly: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/886953410356011008 > Here's how to explain to people the distinction between fighting poverty and fighting economic inequality. If you're fighting poverty, you might say "Let's have universal health care." If you're fighting economic inequality, you have to say "Let's have universal health care. A…

That reads like Graham is poking fun at Google/Larry opposers, am I missing something? He's saying fighting poverty by bringing up the bottom is noble, but fighting inequality by capping the top end is foolish. BTW I agree with him in the sense that indices like Gini coefficients etc. are not comprehensive enough, and optimizing for simple numbers leads to distorted outcomes. I also agree with you in the sense that t…

Post by sooheon » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 3:50 PM UTC

pmcollins wrote: post #115

geofft wrote: post #58

This is an excellent goal, and Paul Graham has articulated the reasoning pretty clearly: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/886953410356011008 > Here's how to explain to people the distinction between fighting poverty and fighting economic inequality. If you're fighting poverty, you might say "Let's have universal health care." If you're fighting economic inequality, you have to say "Let's have universal health care. A…

So if a very capable, a hard working, effective person is able to increase their wealth by 20x, and in so doing increases my wealth by 2x without my doing anything, you'd be in favor of using the power of the state to prevent this from happening because it would increase inequality?