61–70 of 236 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
News sites aren't just providing information: they're trading reporting for ad impressions.
Serious question: are paywalled news articles better at outlinking and do they have no ads?
Example: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/02/us/politics/trump-jan-6-c...
I don't care who wins the election next month, Lina Khan needs to be kept as FTC chair. The FTC has been on a roll the past while.
What has she done that didn't fail or get shot down as political overreach? (not being sarcastic...i mean that i may have missed something inadvertently)
Progress requires testing the system and seeing where the failure points are. It's significantly better than the relative nothing we've gotten from past admins.
Also with the current judicial and congressional makeup it's a wonder anything gets done.
Consider all the "Lina Khan fans" you see on HN and elsewhere. They rarely articulate why the government should be suing these companies, which laws that company broke, or if those laws make sense. They just don't like big companies and want them taken down a peg.
The Google suit was particularly egregious. There was no alternative to Google search because no one had built a better product for reasons that have nothing to do with anticompetitive behavior. And the real irony here is that Google appears to be behind on LLMs, which have finally given us an alternative to typing things into Google. So the government picked the exact moment when Google's search market share is seriously threatened to sue!
Reminder that a mere 15 years ago, Walmart was the unfair monopolist whose market position rendered competition infeasible. Also unclear to me why "ecommerce" is a market unto itself that we should be concerned with level of concentration in, as opposed to simply a slice of the broader "retail" market (which is much less concentrated)
Aa for E-commerce, it can have a larger inventory than physical retail. You're not going to find many solar charge controllers or mechanical keyboard parts at Walmart, but Amazon will have tons of options deliverable within 48 hours. Few sites can have comparable shipping cost/speed and you have to research each one, whereas Amazon enjoys the position of being the default.
A decade ago, I helped a small Amazon seller with his inventory, and it was eye opening to see all the fees and risks compared to eBay. But he couldn't sell on eBay without losing a massive portion of his customer base, despite their better shopping/buying UX in my experience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not every one can afford the name brand. - Sincerely a kid raised on everything store brand.
I dont think anyone's arguing against generic alternatives of name brand items. The issue here is Amazon using up-and-coming and popular products as fodder for them to generic-ize and push to the top of results, essentially knee capping the original seller.
I don't care who wins the election next month, Lina Khan needs to be kept as FTC chair. The FTC has been on a roll the past while.
What has she done that didn't fail or get shot down as political overreach? (not being sarcastic...i mean that i may have missed something inadvertently)
The most consequential merger win was probably the NVIDIA/ARM merger that died under FTC litigation.
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/02/...
Reminder that a mere 15 years ago, Walmart was the unfair monopolist whose market position rendered competition infeasible. Also unclear to me why "ecommerce" is a market unto itself that we should be concerned with level of concentration in, as opposed to simply a slice of the broader "retail" market (which is much less concentrated)
It seems completely reasonable to split brick and mortar sales from web-based, given that the business model is pretty significantly different.
And AWS
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why single out legacy media for this specifically? This isn't something newer media is better at.
Many popular podcasts would show the video, or pull up fact-checking in real time. If that's what you mean by "newer media" I would say it's 10x better. Reuters is legacy media, hence why I mentioned legacy media.
A podcast doesn't include any video data. How could it show a video?
More and more, antitrust is a means for people who dislike big, successful companies for no particular reason to attack them. On some level, the government is just throwing its weight around. The message is "don't forget who's really in charge." Consider all the "Lina Khan fans" you see on HN and elsewhere. They rarely articulate why the government should be suing these companies, which laws that company broke, or if…
But what happens in the scenario where the person comes in, undercuts them, and then sells to the bigger company? How does this force the larger company to change? This is like antitrust 101.
I don't understand people who claim to be proponents of capitalism and are opposed to antitrust. If you want the free market to determine anything with fewer regulations, then we need antitrust. Otherwise we need a lot more regulations. Which one would you prefer?
I have a feeling you wouldn't recognize anticompetitive behavior despite it hitting you in the face for the past 10 years.