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

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#621

Post by andrewla » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 10:06 PM UTC

pedrocr wrote: post #616

andrewla wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is not whether government interference was impactful. My point is exactly that it made no difference. Microsoft lost its position of dominance through purely market ends (in my opinion -- certainly between the US actions and the EU actions you could argue that they made a difference). In retrospect breaking up MS between Windows and Office was not a necessary condition to breaking MS's monopoly, and so we ha…

The tech market would be much different today if they had been broken up. That they're not still the largest tech company in the world is not the same as saying they lost their monopoly somehow. They still have the same monopoly on the desktop OS and more importantly in Office and they still very aggressively maintain those monopolies. There are just other even larger markets today. > In retrospect breaking up MS bet…

That it would be different in inarguable. I feel like I can get on board with the statement that the fact they are no longer the biggest is pretty much equivalent to saying they lost their monopoloy.

In a sense they have a monopoly -- they are the only ones selling Windows. But ... even in the desktop/laptop area they are no longer the beast that they once were. And the prevalence of mobile as a platform means that even their dominance in the desktop/laptop market doesn't mean what it once did.

In office products they have a much stronger position, but the barriers to switching are no longer what they once were. I feel like I can confidently say that Microsoft can no longer coast on their monopoly power, but must actively move forward (with things like Office365) in order to stay competitive.

Are you arguing that even now breaking up OS/Office would be a reasonable thing for the Justice department to pursue? That seems like a barely tenable position.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#622

Post by hwillis » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 10:12 PM UTC

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #452

lotu wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is this type of vertical splitting doesn't solve the problem of large tech companies. It's like treating a burst appendix with a kidney transplant. The problem of Amazon is that it is effectively the only online shopping place, and thus can act as a Monopsony in hiring it's workers for warehouses, splitting AWS out of that doesn't fix that problem. Maybe you could require that distribution centers be owne…

If we had a progressive corporate tax, I think all the problems would sort themselves out. You want to build a trillion dollar company? Fine. Corporate tax rate of 50%. You're a small business with less than $1M in revenue. Cool. Corporate tax rate of 0%. Big companies will break up to take advantage of the tax code. Problem solved. Instead, the bigger you are, the harder you can lobby for tax breaks. Currently, if y…

Only profits are taxed, and they're only vaguely related to revenue, and both profit and revenue are vaguely related to whether a company is a monopoly or not. Profit is an okay-ish measure of how much a monopoly a company is, but not great. Comcast and Amazon turn profits of ~10 billion. Apple is 60 billion, microsoft is 16 billion. Amazon is much more of a monopoly than either of those, and Comcast enjoys a much stronger natural monopoly as well. The industries are just different sizes and the supply/demand curves are different, and for some reason people are just super willing to pay an absurd premium for Apple products.

A progressive corporate tax still makes some sense, and there's basically no excuse for their taxes being less simple than a citizen's. However active management is still required. Markets are fast and efficient but they are often dumb.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#623

Post by patcon » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 10:14 PM UTC

taurath wrote: post #563

jamroom wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree 100% and have long felt this is the right approach. Basically the bigger you get, the harder it gets to keep getting bigger.

I feel like all that will create is "partnership contracts" where a large company will be split into the "ideal" size tax-wise while still being run by an "advisory board". Compensation gets interesting at that point though, so many its an interesting idea.

a constellation of partnerships happening through more tangible corporate boundaries sounds much better. right now it seems to happen in unclear ways, and I assume is much less observable from outside forces (e.g. Sidewalk Labs & Google & Intersection, etc.)

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#624

Post by sbarre » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 10:14 PM UTC

Kaveren wrote: post #420

sarbaz wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is also the first idea I've seen that tries to deal with the free speech problem on the internet. A lot of platforms today apply varying amounts of censorship (like youtube's copyright takedown mess), but there isn't really anything we can do because it's a privately owned platform and they can do whatever they want. But when they control such a large amount of mindshare, we end up putting the idea of free speec…

Just because something has a lot of mindshare doesn't mean you have any business silencing their choices. People who don't agree with the policies of private companies like Facebook can simply not use it. Try Gab if you want a private company that is anti-censorship.

The flaw in this logic is that in today's online world if you want to participate in the relevant discourse, where everyone else is participating, it's Facebook/Twitter/Reddit/etc...

This is like saying if you don't like the debate happening in your city hall or town square, go to the small gathering in the woods to have your conversations.. where no one will hear you, and what you say will have no impact.

I know this the analogy is flawed because there is no "public space" on the Internet.. The places we have chosen to hold our public discourse online are all privately owned..

It's a challenging problem and "go somewhere else" is not a viable solution because it marginalizes and suppresses unpopular opinions or minority groups..

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#625

Post by sadris » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 10:15 PM UTC

Kaveren wrote: post #579

charmides wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like you are just repeating the same specious point that OP was refuting. Right now, it feels like companies like Google are mostly silencing hate speech, violent extremists, and pornography, but there is no guarantee that their censorship will remain that way in the future. In a not-so-hypothetical future where a single private company has taken almost whole control over online media and starts imposing hea…

Yes, that's exactly what I'm going to do. Your opinion has no right to exist on any platform. Don't like it? You can move off of it. Bring other people to a platform that goes by rules you like. I don't use Gab, I am not interested in it, but it exists and has rules you may prefer if this hypothetical situation were to occur. I like diverse viewpoints being allowed. It is unacceptable, however, to be so entitled as t…

Is it equally unacceptable to be entitled to try to force companies to hire/fire who they don't want?

What about forcing companies to offer housing to people they do or don't like?

And what about offering loans? Should companies be forced to offer loans to people, even if they don't want to?

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#626

Post by hwillis » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 10:16 PM UTC

r00fus wrote: post #554

rexpop wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix, Amazon, Boeing, Verizon, these companies are already dodging the regressive taxation we have. How will we enforce progressive taxes?

Perhaps actually funding and staffing the agencies that enforce it?

People always ask this as if it's impossible to change laws or have agencies that actually want to follow through on their missions. As if corporations are so devious and brilliant they are unfindable. It's just not true. If you vote for people who actually want taxes, the enforcement takes care of itself. It works the exact same the other way, because these people gut agencies and replace them.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#627

Post by ams6110 » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 10:16 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #504

elefanten wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's municipal, so the magnitude of threat you're implying (oooh Government ) is a misdirection. GP's point is that consistently lobbying to shut down the existence of any competition, public or private, is monopolistic behavior. And it is, pretty much by definition.

GP used an example of lobbying against the government entering what had heretofore been a private market. Pushing back on that is not "monopolistic" by any sense of the term. If you have examples of Comcast lobbying to prevent private competition, I'd like to hear them. The biggest impediment to private competition actually comes from the public interest sector, which insists on build-out requirements that make it ve…

Exactly what is happening in my town.

The city wanted to launch a municipal internet service. Predictably, it failed because the requirements were to provide service everywhere and the bids all came back too high.

Meanwhile they continue to resist private ISPs who want to expand into neighborhoods where they think they can do so profitably.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#628

Post by sadris » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 10:17 PM UTC

jefe_ wrote: post #260

oceanstone wrote: post #178

> The key components of the Warren plan include passing legislation that would designate companies with annual global revenue above $25 billion that provide marketplace, exchange, or third-party connectivity as “platform utilities” and prohibit those companies from owning participants on their platforms. As a Googler, speaking for myself, this seems like an interesting idea that could positively impact the tech scene…

I could get behind something like this if it also presented these platforms with a consistent framework for moderating content. They reach levels where they are more akin to public spaces than digital communities, and should have moderation strategies which mirror this.

Moderation of public utilities would be unconstitutional.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#629

Post by clairity » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 10:22 PM UTC

rjf72 wrote: post #586

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we had a progressive corporate tax, I think all the problems would sort themselves out. You want to build a trillion dollar company? Fine. Corporate tax rate of 50%. You're a small business with less than $1M in revenue. Cool. Corporate tax rate of 0%. Big companies will break up to take advantage of the tax code. Problem solved. Instead, the bigger you are, the harder you can lobby for tax breaks. Currently, if y…

I think this is an absolutely incredible idea if it could actually be made in a way such that the taxation and other factors could not be easily avoided. But there's one unspoken problem with taxes and particularly corporate taxes. Large companies are perceived as being proportionally beneficial to the US economy. If you made the US a place that was meaningfully undesirable for corporations, they can leave. And even…

generally, large corporations (and wealthy people) do not, and will not, leave the US because of taxes. people want to live here and companies want to do business here. badly. but they also want an unfair advantage and will say anything (like "we'll just take our toys and leave!") to try to get it.

Re: Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Amazon

#630

Post by blisterpeanuts » Fri, Mar 08, 2019, 10:27 PM UTC

Companies do get spun off all the time, if it's determined to benefit shareholders. Why should the government take on this role? It's doubtful they would make decisions that are in the best fiduciary interest of the stock holders, the employees, and the customers. Generally it's best to let market forces play out. Amazon, Facebook & the Goog are pretty massive right now, but things change quickly. Ten years from now, there may be new behemoths that dwarf these companies even as these companies now dwarf former titans like Microsoft and IBM.