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

Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 735 posts

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#391

Post by ocdtrekkie »

psadauskas wrote: post #358
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.

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…

I believe net neutrality is a regulatory capture move, and gives Google and Netflix a stranglehold over the industry: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19316513 Marketing to the contrary, I believe there are good, strong justifications for against net neutrality, as a consumer and someone excited about the future of technology.

Additionally, and far more importantly: Comcast is a regional monopoly. They have a lot of power in some geographic areas of the United States. Google is a global monopoly that has power in nearly every home on the planet. You shouldn't be willing to strengthen a global monopoly to try to fight a regional one.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#392

Post by psadauskas »

giggles_giggles wrote: post #373
psadauskas wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>As a recent example, Net Neutrality involved massive amounts of lobbing and had very clear "pro-consumer" and "anti-consumer" sides This isn't as uncontroversial of an opinion as it might appear to be in a place like HN. What you're admitting here basically is that you think Comcast should be broken up because they lobby for things you don't like, but FAANG is fine because they lobby for things you do.

No, you're putting words in my mouth, or misunderstanding my point.

> you think Comcast should be broken up

I think efforts to break up tech monopolies should first be focused on telecommunication companies.

> because they lobby for things you don't like,

Not just me, but are objectively harmful to 99% of the people they would affect

> but FAANG is fine because they lobby for things you do.

I'm mostly focusing on Google here, and yes, they at least occasionally lobby for things I like because sometimes their interests and the interests of the public in general happen to align.

With Comcast (and other ISPs), you have only one choice, and they spend tons of money and effort making sure you only have that one choice, and continue to have only that one choice. Comcast recently spent nearly $1M to prevent Fort Collins from creating a municipal ISP[1]. That is actively anti-competitive and monopolistic by definition.

[1]: https://muninetworks.org/content/totals-are-comcast-spends-9...

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#393

Post by SamuelAdams »

basch wrote: post #276
furst wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook owns Instagram, Whatsapp, and dozens other platforms. Sure, Facebook proper is bleeding users, but the platform gaining the most users right now is Instagram, which is still Facebook. Google would be fairly easy to break up among Alphabet subsidiaries, and Amazon could be split among Amazon.com, AWS, and Whole Foods. She actually gets fairly specific about what she her plan is if you actually read the medium…

If youre going to break up Amazon, AWS, and Whole Foods for being vertically integrated, how can you not break up the oil companies or the agriculture companies or the chemical companies.

You could also argue that Apple is "too vertically integrated" and separate them into either a Laptop / Phone company or a Hardware / software company. Or break out music / media / Beats into it's own company too.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#394

Post by morpheuskafka »

rayiner wrote: post #104
crowbahr wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gut reaction: I feel like Android would not survive Google being forced to remove all their apps from the Google play store.

That would be great. Android has a competition-destroying business model: giving away the OS for free, while subsidizing OS development with ad revenue from unrelated services. It killed companies like Symbian who just sold you an OS in exchange for a license fee, without trying to marry that to services you can't easily switch away from because they have all your data.

So basically big companies will no longer have any reason to work on open source projects anymore if they can't fund them with "unrelated services?" You can head over to github, clone the AOSP tree, and do whatever the heck you want with it. Separately, Google has developed the Play ecosystem, and several of its own apps for Android. If you want you phone to have that stuff, you tell Google and you join the Open Handset Alliance or whatever its called now. If you don't, you start from AOSP (as does Amazon, for example) and don't give Google the time of day. So they give away a massive boost to anyone who wants to make a mobile device, and somehow that's a bad thing?

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#395

Post by rayiner »

f-securus wrote: post #371
rayiner wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has 90% search market share--Comcast doesn't have that even in areas where it is the sole high-speed wired provider (because DSL and cellular are viable alternatives for a significant part of the population). And over large swaths of its service area it isn't the only high-speed wired option. I don't know where you're located, but I've lived in Chicago, Atlanta, DC, Baltimore, Annapolis, New York, and Philadel…

It isn't about market share. It is about consumer choice. Access to google alternatives are available to everyone. Many people don't have a reasonable choice when it comes to broadband.

Economists traditionally analyze market concentration in terms of market share, not the mere existence of choice. I will point out that you felt the need to qualify "choice" with "reasonable"--because Comcast competes with DSL and cellular almost everywhere. But that some qualifier applies to search. Even in markets where Comcast is the only cable provider, it usually doesn't have anything close to 90% market share, because DSL and cellular are a "reasonable choice" for quite a lot of people. (About half of households don't subscribe to any streaming video service.) Thus, judging by market share, Google alternatives are apparently even less viable in the search industry than DSL and cellular are in the home broadband industry.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#396

Post by jklinger410 »

sj3k wrote: post #197
neuronic wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If, as usual, people are voting heavily against their own interests and more according to the lobbyist propaganda fed by economics 101 professors, then you are likely on point.

what lobbyists are lobbying to break up big tech companies? Not everything is propaganda.

Telco, Walmart, any company that would rather have a big brand with name association on the hot seat instead of them.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#397

Post by CamperBob2 »

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.

Lobbying is tracked and google spent over 33% more than Comcast - in your own words - bribing members of Congress.

Probably because they saw what happened when Microsoft tried to ignore Washington, DC. altogether. Can you blame Google for realizing that they couldn't just turn their backs on the game?

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#398

Post by cowl »

giggles_giggles wrote: post #373
psadauskas wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>As a recent example, Net Neutrality involved massive amounts of lobbing and had very clear "pro-consumer" and "anti-consumer" sides This isn't as uncontroversial of an opinion as it might appear to be in a place like HN. What you're admitting here basically is that you think Comcast should be broken up because they lobby for things you don't like, but FAANG is fine because they lobby for things you do.

OFC that is the measure. If they have lobbied for things that actually make our life better or make it worse. Lobbing is inevitable and Desirable too.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#399

Post by smacktoward »

mywittyname wrote: post #269
ortusdux wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We also broke up Ma Bell back in 84 and it looks like they are on their way to fully reuniting as an even larger monopoly. https://i.imgur.com/rMFqmbt.jpg https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/03/att-time-warner...

That's a different failure. The government should have never allowed for the subsequent mergers.

The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#400

Post by i_am_proteus »

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…

What's an alternative model for telecommunications operation to what's in place today? We broke up Ma Bell, and now we're thinking about breaking up her descendants.

Even if Comcast et al. get broken up, we'll probably just end up with poor customer service from the resultant components until they merge.

Post reply on HN