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

Antitrust Troubles Snowball for Tech Giants as Lawmakers Join In

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 309 posts

Re: Antitrust Troubles Snowball for Tech Giants as Lawmakers Join In

#281

Post by briantakita »

refurb wrote: post #245
bilbo0s wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but we've almost immediately started down the road that HN user fyoving is cautioning us against. The idea that our government is going to go after financial firms is a bit fanciful. (In all honesty, legally speaking, fyoving is even correct in asserting that they aren't even going after tech firms.) When you're getting people's hopes up by making them think that something is going…

Are you arguing that politicians would spend ten years investigating companies with the full knowledge they won’t get anywhere with it beyond political brownie points? If so, I agree 100%.

I agree < 100% as this is one of many benefits for a politician to take this stance. Another benefit is leverage over an industry. Leverage is a tool that can be used for different purposes. Even if the courts thwart one possible outcome, there are other possible outcomes.

Re: Antitrust Troubles Snowball for Tech Giants as Lawmakers Join In

#282

Post by rellui »

mailslot wrote: post #132
Meekro wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Visa and Mastercard have a pretty effective duopoly, too! Their fees and chargeback procedures are a drag on the entire economy. Getting banned by them effectively kills your ability to accept payments, and many legal but politically unpopular businesses find themselves in the crosshairs.

Can we include Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion to the list of monopolistic anti-competitive financial companies?

The shitty thing about Equifax is that there's no way to not be a part of their credit score system. For Visa and MC, I can choose to not use their cards and go with something else. With Equifax, I can't stop using their service to stifle their business. I'm amazed the government is not intervening in cases like these where the end consumers have no choice in the matter.

Re: Antitrust Troubles Snowball for Tech Giants as Lawmakers Join In

#283

Post by root_axis »

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #253
root_axis wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? red & blue definitely don't agree on NN. I know some might point to poll numbers that suggest a majority of republicans support NN, but its important to remember that republicans are ideologically opposed to politicians that support NN. This is similar to how a majority of republicans support universal background checks for firearms but nobody suggests that "red/blue agree" on this issue because, despite support…

>despite supporting universal background checks, republicans are ideologically opposed to the type of politician that supports background checks. You don’t sound like you know much on this topic. When the poll question is asked as: “Do you support background checks when purchasing a firearm to keep criminals from getting guns” the answer is high. When the question is more appropriately asked as: “Do you support the g…

Your proposed wording is disingenuous partisan spin that encodes your own point of you into the question. Fortunately, even partisan polling organizations wouldn't waste their time with such a stilted questionnaire.

Re: Antitrust Troubles Snowball for Tech Giants as Lawmakers Join In

#284

Post by SlowRobotAhead »

root_axis wrote: post #283
SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>despite supporting universal background checks, republicans are ideologically opposed to the type of politician that supports background checks. You don’t sound like you know much on this topic. When the poll question is asked as: “Do you support background checks when purchasing a firearm to keep criminals from getting guns” the answer is high. When the question is more appropriately asked as: “Do you support the g…

Your proposed wording is disingenuous partisan spin that encodes your own point of you into the question. Fortunately, even partisan polling organizations wouldn't waste their time with such a stilted questionnaire.

The second wording reflects the indisputable reality of the proposal. But... please feel free to tell me why I’m mistaken.

You can start with why the Federal Firearm License requirements make sense to only 1/2 deploy to citizens while preventing their access from the NICS system directly, that a citizen’s rights should be directly tied to a 4473.

Then also please tell me why the compromise of the 1993/4 Brady Bill where private sales were EXPLICITLY protected in order to get the votes to pass - were only two years later called a “loophole”.

I look forward to being educated on this topic.

Re: Antitrust Troubles Snowball for Tech Giants as Lawmakers Join In

#285

Post by anthonypasq »

xamuel wrote: post #271
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The housing case is non-traditional because the entity the cartel organizes through is the local government rather than a corporation. You have to live somewhere to get a vote there, so the people (sellers) who already own property in a location get a vote while the people (buyers) who are about to move there don't until after they have and have switched from customer to owner. The result is that the existing propert…

You're painting a picture of greedy homeowners restricting housing to make their investments go up. But there are other, more legitimate reasons for homeowners to resist turning every town into high-density mega-apartments. Some people highly value a quiet neighborhood. Some people (like myself) are extremely sensitive to the sounds of neighbors playing music with subwoofers. Good luck avoiding that in a high-density…

then dont live in a city.

Re: Antitrust Troubles Snowball for Tech Giants as Lawmakers Join In

#286

Post by root_axis »

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #284
root_axis wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your proposed wording is disingenuous partisan spin that encodes your own point of you into the question. Fortunately, even partisan polling organizations wouldn't waste their time with such a stilted questionnaire.

The second wording reflects the indisputable reality of the proposal. But... please feel free to tell me why I’m mistaken. You can start with why the Federal Firearm License requirements make sense to only 1/2 deploy to citizens while preventing their access from the NICS system directly, that a citizen’s rights should be directly tied to a 4473. Then also please tell me why the compromise of the 1993/4 Brady Bill wh…

> reflects the indisputable reality of the proposal

No, it reflects your stubborn partisan viewpoint which I'm uninterested in debating.

https://www.people-press.org/2015/08/13/continued-bipartisan...

The numbers speak for themselves. Unless you have some alternative polling data to show I am not interested.

Re: Antitrust Troubles Snowball for Tech Giants as Lawmakers Join In

#287

Post by mikestew »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #273
gwd wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is nonsense. You can just buy a different phone -- there are dozens of companies out there. Apple's "tax" allows them to pay for software without selling my data. At the moment, I have a choice: 1) Buy software funded by spying on me (any Android phone) 2) Buy software funded by selling to me (and iPhone). If they're forced to "open up" their platform, then their revenue stream becomes more difficult, and I don'…

> Apple's "tax" allows them to pay for software without selling my data. It does? macOS seems to do well enough on the privacy front. I don't think Apple's App Store, or its 30% cut, needs to disappear, but consumers should have the option of running software from outside the store too. That's adding choice, not taking it away.

but consumers should have the option of running software from outside the store too

They do. It just won't run on iOS. That's a choice Apple made, and by extension, a choice the purchaser made when they bought the phone. For example, it is a primary feature that holds some responsibility for my continued use of iOS.

That's adding choice, not taking it away.

Yeah, who is Apple to say that I didn't want my entire contact list uploaded to a Russian server? Maybe I like a little malware mixed in with my Kandy Krusher.

In summary, if you don't want to pay a 30% surcharge for vetted software and a system that ensures that those you support technically will load only vetted software, an iPhone probably isn't for you or your loved ones.

Re: Antitrust Troubles Snowball for Tech Giants as Lawmakers Join In

#288

Post by stcredzero »

kortilla wrote: post #244
stcredzero wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are correct, sir! I remember now HN has had this discussion before. However, I think most people would refer to both a Monopsony and Monopoly as the latter.

No, that’s not true. People rarely even consider that there is a special term for being the only buyer or controlling all of the buyers. I can’t think of any scenarios where people referred to the military as having a monopoly on the missile market. It doesn’t make sense because it doesn’t even make missiles.

I can’t think of any scenarios where people referred to the military as having a monopoly on the missile market.

But Farmers being ravaged by middlemen would use that term about the middlemen buying their crops.

Re: Antitrust Troubles Snowball for Tech Giants as Lawmakers Join In

#289

Post by Wowfunhappy »

mikestew wrote: post #287
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple's "tax" allows them to pay for software without selling my data. It does? macOS seems to do well enough on the privacy front. I don't think Apple's App Store, or its 30% cut, needs to disappear, but consumers should have the option of running software from outside the store too. That's adding choice, not taking it away.

but consumers should have the option of running software from outside the store too They do. It just won't run on iOS. That's a choice Apple made, and by extension, a choice the purchaser made when they bought the phone. For example, it is a primary feature that holds some responsibility for my continued use of iOS. That's adding choice, not taking it away. Yeah, who is Apple to say that I didn't want my entire conta…

Ironically, I actually think a more open platform could increase privacy significantly. On a Mac, you can install Little Snitch to carefully monitor connections into and out of your phone. Security researchers also have the ability to probe apps as they see fit. Not on the iPhone.

The iPhones's closed nature also prevents security researchers from sufficiently examining third party apps for vulnerabilities.

Re: Antitrust Troubles Snowball for Tech Giants as Lawmakers Join In

#290

Post by mikestew »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #289
mikestew wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but consumers should have the option of running software from outside the store too They do. It just won't run on iOS. That's a choice Apple made, and by extension, a choice the purchaser made when they bought the phone. For example, it is a primary feature that holds some responsibility for my continued use of iOS. That's adding choice, not taking it away. Yeah, who is Apple to say that I didn't want my entire conta…

Ironically, I actually think a more open platform could increase privacy significantly. On a Mac, you can install Little Snitch to carefully monitor connections into and out of your phone. Security researchers also have the ability to probe apps as they see fit. Not on the iPhone. The iPhones's closed nature also prevents security researchers from sufficiently examining third party apps for vulnerabilities.

That's all well and good, despite doing little to address my point, but you seem to be dodging the question of why you don't just go buy an Android phone. You don't like how the guy at the local convenience store treats you? Pound sand and go down the block to the other one. You have yet to explain why you don't do the same with phones. I happen to like the way iOS works in the this respect, and you sound like someone that just moved into the neighborhood complaining things that have been that way for the last 20 years.
Post reply on HN