> breaks itself
The CCP has nothing to do with it, I'm sure.
Alibaba breaks itself up in six
41–50 of 321 posts
Re: Alibaba breaks itself up in six
#42It's interesting to contrast China's approach of not allowing business to operate within the plane of power in which the government does, vs. the United States, which has companies whose power is certainly on the level of many state governments.
I came across a comment that resonated with me and seems relevant in this context, so I saved it. It says: "The arc of communism is long and it leans towards oppressing the fuck out of people. It’s a tendency of all governmental systems. Communism rests most of its power in the hands of government without a moneyed elite to oppose them, so it tends to move to authoritarianism faster and with less resistance."
Maybe from the perspective of the moneyed elite, but in what universe is China breaking up a monopoly an indicator of "authoritarianism"
Re: Alibaba breaks itself up in six
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple into hardware and software. Microsoft into OS and other software and cloud. Amazon into cloud and web store(s). Google into ads and web software that serves ads.
It doesn't make sense to split Apple into hardware and software since the integration and simplicity that comes from it is the very thing that makes Apple unique.
This is nothing new. IBM was required to sell software separate from their hardware...
Re: Alibaba breaks itself up in six
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So people are hoping that now the worst of it is done What is the basis of this hope?
Presumably because Alibaba - the challenger that started this crackdown - is now slain. On a political level, there are only so many Chinese companies with enough power to actually threaten the CCP, and Alibaba is probably enough of an example to keep them in line - further crackdowns are probably unnecessary.
There's been lots of "crackdowns" before Alibaba. Maybe "slain" as well but no not the only victim.
Re: Alibaba breaks itself up in six
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree, and think it would be harmful. I think we’d be better off splitting up the US government into smaller pieces but everyone loses their mind when I suggest it.
Like states or regions or cities? You are not the first to have this idea. It was a founding principle for the US
Agreed, and local power tends to be much more responsive and accountable than the Feds. It's one of the best parts of the system (the Senate is the worst imo)
Re: Alibaba breaks itself up in six
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple Hardware, Apple Licensed OSes, Apple Online Services, Apple Financial Services (apple card & apple pay & co), Apple News Services, Apple Mapping Services. Think of everything that Apple (Meta, Google) do, think on which components would benefit from having startups replace and distrupt them and then break them up on those seams while forcing them to allow competition between their fragments (e.g. iPhone with An…
Which of them will own apple.com? Which of them will own Apple trademark? Which of them will own Apple logo?
For a point of reference here have a look at how many independent companies share the “Sparkasse” or “Raiffeisen”
trademarks and Logos on Europe.
Re: Alibaba breaks itself up in six
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would you split Apple? How would you split Meta (would you start charging for WhatsApp)?
Apple into hardware and software. Microsoft into OS and other software and cloud. Amazon into cloud and web store(s). Google into ads and web software that serves ads.
Microsoft OS is too powerful, split it into Kernel and user space
Re: Alibaba breaks itself up in six
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not an expert on this, but from what I gather this all leads back to a power struggle between Jack Ma and Xi Jinping. Ma was ready to go public with AliPay and in the build up to it made a speech that criticised the government regulation as being out of date. This was viewed as a challenge to the governments power. Over the next few months the government moved to tighten regulations on companies like AliPay and d…
Completely OT: > Over the next few months the government [...] disappeared Jack Ma. Huh, I've never seen "disappear" being used as a transitive verb. I kinda like it and I think I'll put it in my language toolbox.
It’s quite common when talking about oppressive authoritarian regimes.
Re: Alibaba breaks itself up in six
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple Hardware, Apple Licensed OSes, Apple Online Services, Apple Financial Services (apple card & apple pay & co), Apple News Services, Apple Mapping Services. Think of everything that Apple (Meta, Google) do, think on which components would benefit from having startups replace and distrupt them and then break them up on those seams while forcing them to allow competition between their fragments (e.g. iPhone with An…
Which of them will own apple.com? Which of them will own Apple trademark? Which of them will own Apple logo?
We can compromise and say "none" :P
Re: Alibaba breaks itself up in six
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not an expert on this, but from what I gather this all leads back to a power struggle between Jack Ma and Xi Jinping. Ma was ready to go public with AliPay and in the build up to it made a speech that criticised the government regulation as being out of date. This was viewed as a challenge to the governments power. Over the next few months the government moved to tighten regulations on companies like AliPay and d…
Completely OT: > Over the next few months the government [...] disappeared Jack Ma. Huh, I've never seen "disappear" being used as a transitive verb. I kinda like it and I think I'll put it in my language toolbox.
It's a powerful phrase, associated with oppressive regimes. It should be used with the same level of care as "pogrom" or "reeducation".