541–550 of 600 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, very productive things have come out of the dog and pony show: tons of conversation and debate amongst voters as people familiarize themselves with the nuance of these topics. Do I trust the politicians? Maybe not the ones you're describing but read through Elizabeth Warren's proposal around platform utilities: https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big... Maybe you agree, maybe you don't - the…
Right because a representative who asked Zuckerberg about a Twitter policy is really smart. The very first paragraph she used MS as an example of when the government intervened in tech. How did that work out? Microsoft is still one of the five largest companies in tech and still has the same dominance in PC operating systems and productivity apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Spotify also doesn’t allow in app purchases so Apple doesn’t get a cut. This is how Spotify and Netflix are harmed. They have to pick between funding their competitor, or not providing simple signups and subscriptions on one of the worlds largest computing platforms. This directly harms either their revenue stream or cost-of-acquisition. Both to the advantage of one of one of their largest competitors who has artif…
So can we also regulate Spotify for taking a much larger cut from artists? Spotify has a much larger share in streaming music than Apple has in phones. Also. I can’t sign up for a Netflix subscription on my Roku either.
Nothing is stopping another streaming service from offering a bigger cut to artists (indeed Tide purports to do exactly this).
If Spotify started pushing artist contracts that prevented artists from getting a better deal else where, then they should be regulated. But they don’t, and there’s plenty of artists that don’t sell on Spotify because they don’t like the deal they offer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not "more power over tech," it's the job of government. Distribution of power, promoting competition, tweaking the rules as little as is deemed necessary. Is it really so outrageous to consider there might be a consolidation of power in a way we haven't dealt with before, seeing Amazon crush partners overnight, or Facebook impacting elections? The very same HN that longs for the early internet, with web rings an…
Facebook impacted elections for conservatives - the same people that are complaining about an anti conservative bias. What would you propose the government do? Force people not to use FB who willingly go to their site? Have the government say what is and is not allowed on their platform.
As far as what I might want to see, since you asked: for one, I would like to see more rigor around the acquisition process to eliminate or even undo some of the consolidation. I won't pretend to understand the details of how or what needs to change, but I am more than open to taking a hard look at things like WhatsApp and Instagram being acquired by Facebook and what kinds of power centralization that enables. I hope smarter people than me will do that research and make intelligible cases so we can all hold evidence-backed positions.
Look at the valuation, never mind the societal impact, of these companies -- data is worth far more than your average consumer realizes, at least once it hits an inflection point, and our laws don't currently reflect that. Maybe they should, maybe they shouldn't. I welcome the discovery, and don't feel like we need to be anywhere near a solution yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right because a representative who asked Zuckerberg about a Twitter policy is really smart. The very first paragraph she used MS as an example of when the government intervened in tech. How did that work out? Microsoft is still one of the five largest companies in tech and still has the same dominance in PC operating systems and productivity apps.
I said "voters are discussing" and you said "representatives are idiots". I'm not sure you're hearing my POV. Stupid questions and ineffective historical decisions or not, are you suggesting we just throw in the towel based on a snapshot of our government? Can we not vote in better representation once the population tears into these issues and better understand the outcomes we want?
- gun control
- health care
- unemployment
- “The War on Christmas”
- “those evil immigrants who are taking away your jobs”
- banning straws so we stop killing fish
- free college education
The fact is that the only reason $BigTech is $BigTech is because people voluntarily use their products - especially Apple that has a minority market share and charges a premium. Everyone knows how much money they give Apple/Amazon for their products - unlike Facebook and Google.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So can we also regulate Spotify for taking a much larger cut from artists? Spotify has a much larger share in streaming music than Apple has in phones. Also. I can’t sign up for a Netflix subscription on my Roku either.
Spotify isn’t using their market dominance in another industry to squeeze either artists or competitors. Nothing is stopping another streaming service from offering a bigger cut to artists (indeed Tide purports to do exactly this). If Spotify started pushing artist contracts that prevented artists from getting a better deal else where, then they should be regulated. But they don’t, and there’s plenty of artists that…
Nothing is stopping another streaming service from offering a bigger cut to artists (indeed Tide purports to do exactly this).
A bigger cut of a tiny pie? In the same vein nothing is stopping app developers from ignoring iOS or users from buying iPhones, using Google, FaceBook, or Amazon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spotify isn’t using their market dominance in another industry to squeeze either artists or competitors. Nothing is stopping another streaming service from offering a bigger cut to artists (indeed Tide purports to do exactly this). If Spotify started pushing artist contracts that prevented artists from getting a better deal else where, then they should be regulated. But they don’t, and there’s plenty of artists that…
Spotify isn’t using their market dominance in streaming to give artist a pittance? Nothing is stopping another streaming service from offering a bigger cut to artists (indeed Tide purports to do exactly this). A bigger cut of a tiny pie? In the same vein nothing is stopping app developers from ignoring iOS or users from buying iPhones, using Google, FaceBook, or Amazon.
What evidence do you have back this up? There’s every suggestion that Spotify are struggling to defend themselves against artists who demand bigger payments.
Additionally there’s every suggestion that Apple Music now have a larger portion of the market than Spotify, and if it hasn’t happened yet, it will soon.
All of that is ignoring other competitors like Google Music (or YouTube, wherever they’re calling it today) and Amazon Music.
Simply put, your assertion fails on multiple fronts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Nobody is forcing them to be iPhone developers" - HN
Well it's true isn't it? People make bad career choices all the time. And people also build failing business and we shouldn't save those companies because "they deserve it".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I said "voters are discussing" and you said "representatives are idiots". I'm not sure you're hearing my POV. Stupid questions and ineffective historical decisions or not, are you suggesting we just throw in the towel based on a snapshot of our government? Can we not vote in better representation once the population tears into these issues and better understand the outcomes we want?
Yes because out of all the issues that voters care about. I’m sure “breaking up big tech” so you can put an emulator on an iPhone ranks above (hopefully my list equally hits conservative and liberal talking points): - gun control - health care - unemployment - “The War on Christmas” - “those evil immigrants who are taking away your jobs” - banning straws so we stop killing fish - free college education The fact is th…
Most people I know are more than capable to read, learn, and form educated opinions on everything on your list as well as this topic.
We might be at a stalemate here since you won't be convincing me the discovery process into these issues isn't worth it, and I'm not sure I can convince you to not judge an entire nation by its lowest common denominator, be it extreme left or extreme right, which is what I'm drawing from your previous comment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spotify isn’t using their market dominance in streaming to give artist a pittance? Nothing is stopping another streaming service from offering a bigger cut to artists (indeed Tide purports to do exactly this). A bigger cut of a tiny pie? In the same vein nothing is stopping app developers from ignoring iOS or users from buying iPhones, using Google, FaceBook, or Amazon.
> Spotify isn’t using their market dominance in streaming to give artist a pittance? What evidence do you have back this up? There’s every suggestion that Spotify are struggling to defend themselves against artists who demand bigger payments. Additionally there’s every suggestion that Apple Music now have a larger portion of the market than Spotify, and if it hasn’t happened yet, it will soon. All of that is ignoring…
So you’re okay with Spotify “defending themselves” against artist who want more of a cut?
It takes 180,000 plays to make minimum wage.
https://help.songtrust.com/knowledge/what-is-the-pay-rate-fo...
Spotify also takes a 30% cut.
Artist are also complaining about Spotify’s payout.
https://www.businessofapps.com/data/spotify-statistics/
It has drawn criticism from recording artists, who complain that it pays too little. Claims to democratize the music industry
Maybe Spotify needs to remember that whole “those in glass houses”.
Actually Apple Music pays artists more per stream than Spotify.