Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon • Hacker News Board

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#351

Post by genericone » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 5:23 PM UTC

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #302

psadauskas wrote: post #211

How about going after Comcast and Verizon first, the actual tech monopolies ? I already don’t use Facebook, I buy things online from places other than Amazon, and have email accounts that aren’t hosted by Google. However, all of that goes over Comcast’s network because that’s my only viable choice for Internet service. Also, while FAANG occasionally do things I don’t approve of, they don’t actively lobby congress for…

That's a really good point. Let's nationalize the ISPs!

On the internet it's hard to tell if that is real enthusiasm or sarcasm.

Enthusiasm: Telco cartels need more oversight, make them government run, so they are beholden to the people. They serve themselves at a nice profit at everyone's expense, but internet communications have become so intertwined in culture, commerce, national security, that there really is no reason they shouldn't be part of the government apparatus.

Sarcasm: Government run telcos will cost taxpayers even more money, work worse than they do now, and increase government pensions to be payed out. US Internet will stagnate as a result of people getting into telco as a cushy government position.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#352

Post by basch » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 5:23 PM UTC

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #111

jsutton wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For starters, Amazon provided a marketplace platform for third parties to sell goods. They then gathered data on which items sold the best, created their own line of products based off this data, and crushed their customers-turned-competitors using their massive advantage in economies of scale.

Looking at the vast majority of Amazon Basics goods, I just don't see how they would have needed to use marketplace data to come up with what products to sell. Batteries, clothes (lots of clothes), backpacks, these are all products that are cheap to produce and where brand loyalty plays a large role. People generally trust the name Amazon. It's not rocket science to realize people want cheap clothes and batteries.

its a little more than just Basics, but youre right its a ton of clothing.

https://www.amazon.com/b?ie=UTF8&node=17602470011

https://www.recode.net/2018/4/7/17208804/amazon-private-labe...

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#353

Post by bko » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 5:24 PM UTC

> The story demonstrates why promoting competition is so important: it allows new, groundbreaking companies to grow and thrive — which pushes everyone in the marketplace to offer better products and services. Aren’t we all glad that now we have the option of using Google instead of being stuck with Bing?

It's dishonest to suggest that the outcome of the US vs Microsoft somehow paved the way for Google. I would argue it was pretty non-consequential but looms in the public conscious.

From wikipedia:

> On November 2, 2001, the DOJ reached an agreement with Microsoft to settle the case. The proposed settlement required Microsoft to share its application programming interfaces with third-party companies and appoint a panel of three people who would have full access to Microsoft's systems, records, and source code for five years in order to ensure compliance.[29] However, the DOJ did not require Microsoft to change any of its code nor prevent Microsoft from tying other software with Windows in the future ... > Law professor Eben Moglen noted that the way Microsoft was required to disclose its APIs and protocols was useful only for “interoperating with a Windows Operating System Product”, not for implementing support of those APIs and protocols in any competing operating system.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#354

Post by sleepysysadmin » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 5:25 PM UTC

kevinmchugh wrote: post #24

sleepysysadmin wrote: post #16

To what end? "illegally undermine competition?" She is inferring that Google/Amazon/Facebook are committing anti-trust crimes? What proof does she have? >Companies would be barred from transferring or sharing users’ data with third parties. That can be done without breaking them up. I don't think she realizes that splitting up amazon and amazon basics will do little to nothing. There are other things that can be done…

> You could require freedom of speech apply to industry leaders for example. What does this mean? Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey, Jeff Bezos, et al already have their constitutionally protected speech, except for where their roles as executives at public companies restrict them. If they find those restrictions onerous they can leave their roles.

If Twitter decides tomorrow to ban the right-wing from their platform. They absolutely legally can. If you watch the recent Joe Rogan video with Tim Pool and Jack Dorsey. They didn't realize they were slowly banning the right-wing and allowing left-wing terrorists to stay on Twitter. They absolutely didn't realize they were doing this and they are going to look at fixing this.

The government however could come in and simply make it that you have freedom of speech on social media. So if Twitter bans someone for saying "a man cannot be a woman" that person can sue them.

The democrats will NOT do this however, the current censorship on social media is benefiting the left-wing.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#355

Post by tzs » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 5:25 PM UTC

psadauskas wrote: post #211

How about going after Comcast and Verizon first, the actual tech monopolies ? I already don’t use Facebook, I buy things online from places other than Amazon, and have email accounts that aren’t hosted by Google. However, all of that goes over Comcast’s network because that’s my only viable choice for Internet service. Also, while FAANG occasionally do things I don’t approve of, they don’t actively lobby congress for…

> However, all of that goes over Comcast’s network because that’s my only viable choice for Internet service.

An antitrust breakup of Comcast would be one or both of:

1. splitting off different lines of business, such as the content production parts from the physical cable service part, or

2. splitting them into different companies geographically.

Neither of these would do much to increase your ISP options.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#356

Post by will_brown » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 5:25 PM UTC

savethefuture wrote: post #341

will_brown wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But no, because Comcast has -bribed- donated to way more congresspeople than Google... Lobbying is tracked and google spent over 33% more than Comcast - in your own words - bribing members of Congress. The bulk of Google’s lobbying expenditure was for immigration, tax reform and antitrust. I’d say Google’s far better “at playing the game” after all no one is randomly sticking up for Comcast.

Can you please provide source links to this 33%? I assume it is public info but where do I find that.

Opensecrets.org will let you search public companies lobbying spend (and other info).

Or you can un-ironically google “google lobbying” and find more detailed articles about Google’s lobbying published by time, fortune, Bloomberg, etc...

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#357

Post by decebalus1 » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 5:26 PM UTC

partingshots wrote: post #70

To my knowledge, American monopoly laws focus more on the welfare of the consumer and whether customers are being negatively affected rather than the companies themselves. There’s nothing wrong with having a monopoly, but where issues arise is when consumers start to be hurt. In this context, how do Elizabeth Warren’s comments mesh out?

I recommend listening to Planet money's series on antitrust. You'll see why your statement was indeed the rationale behind not enforcing the monopoly regulations. Spoiler: it wasn't the care for the welfare of the consumer.

https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?stor...

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#358

Post by psadauskas » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 5:26 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #326

psadauskas wrote: post #211

How about going after Comcast and Verizon first, the actual tech monopolies ? I already don’t use Facebook, I buy things online from places other than Amazon, and have email accounts that aren’t hosted by Google. However, all of that goes over Comcast’s network because that’s my only viable choice for Internet service. Also, while FAANG occasionally do things I don’t approve of, they don’t actively lobby congress for…

>But no, because Comcast has -bribed- donated to way more congresspeople than Google... Lobbying is tracked and google spent over 33% more than Comcast - in your own words - bribing members of Congress. The bulk of Google’s lobbying expenditure was for immigration, tax reform and antitrust. I’d say Google’s far better “at playing the game” after all no one is randomly sticking up for Comcast.

You're right, I should have checked the facts before speculating on which company spent more on lobbying. However, the things they are lobbying for/against also matter. As a recent example, Net Neutrality involved massive amounts of lobbing and had very clear "pro-consumer" and "anti-consumer" sides.

From https://www.opensecrets.org/news/issues/net_neutrality/

> Not only was Google the pro-net neutrality organization that spent the most on lobbying in 2014 — $16.8 million in 2014 — it was the 10th biggest spender on federal lobbying that year. Impressive as that sounds, however, it still ranked behind both Comcast and the National Cable and Telecommunications Association.

And it seems like every dollar that Comcast spends lobbying is directed towards efforts that will have a negative impact on my life, and the lives of everyone not on Comcast's board of directors. At least with Google, sometimes our incentives align, so that's another point in favor of attempting to break up the Comcast monopoly before the Google one.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#359

Post by djrogers » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 5:26 PM UTC

yaacov wrote: post #176

Nitpicking here, but in Warren’s post she writes: > Google couldn’t smother competitors by demoting their products on Google Search. Isn’t this already illegal?

What US law would dictate that? Google isn't a common carrier, and there are no laws dictating that a privately created platform must give equal weight and promotion to everyone...

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#360

Post by stcredzero » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 5:27 PM UTC

fanzhang wrote: post #247

psadauskas wrote: post #211

How about going after Comcast and Verizon first, the actual tech monopolies ? I already don’t use Facebook, I buy things online from places other than Amazon, and have email accounts that aren’t hosted by Google. However, all of that goes over Comcast’s network because that’s my only viable choice for Internet service. Also, while FAANG occasionally do things I don’t approve of, they don’t actively lobby congress for…

Also, does the public have the image of Comcast and Verizon CEOs as being specific people who are really rich and dislikable? So that taking them down a notch will make the public happy? And so taking them down a notch is a good political stance? To be fair, I think there is some argument that some of the larger tech giants would benefit consumer welfare by being broken up. Facebook probably less so since people alre…

To be fair, I think there is some argument that some of the larger tech giants would benefit consumer welfare by being broken up. Facebook probably less so since people already have choice.

It's only kinda choice. They have such a dominance over the social graph, most people who "leave" them don't actually completely leave. Most of them keep Facebook around as an address-book+messaging. People who "leave" by actually deleting their account then turn around and create obvious dummy accounts.