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

Calling for Antitrust Reform

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 212 posts

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#71

Post by mind-blight »

Hellbanevil wrote: post #30
huitzitziltzin wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I teach antitrust to grads and undergrads. It doesn’t do anyone any good to call any of these firms “monopolies.” It’s not accurate, not for any of them. Nor was monopoly the issue in the Microsoft case (that was about bundling). There may be reasons to look at antitrust law and to change it with some of these firms and their behaviors in mind but “vertical monopoly” isn’t an accurate characterization of any of them.

When a company can loose money on a competiting company just to drive the competing company out of business; I call that a monopoly. No not monopolies like we had like the Bell telephone, but we have 2-3 huge companies that collude and stifle competition. Proving collusion is hard these days though. Too many fresh faced MBA's who are atheists. (I'm a Watch Repairer. I can't buy parts from The Swatch Group, or Reichmo…

> Proving collusion is hard these days though. Too many fresh faced MBA's who are atheists.

What does a person's religious beliefs have to do with hiding collusion? That's a helluva straw man to pull into the conversation, and it completely derails your first point.

I was nodding during your first paragraph, then did a double take to make sure I read the second right.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#72

Post by [deleted] »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #34

> We are further challenged by app store rules designed to keep out Gecko, our independent browser engine that powers Firefox, Tor and other browsers. Ironically, getting rid of Apple’s browser restrictions will likely result in website developers writing their sites just for Chrome. With Chrome now available on every platform, it will be cheaper and easier to only support that one browser.

[deleted]

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#73

Post by paulryanrogers »

threeseed wrote: post #60
tehlike wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safari on mobile has lagged behind standards for a long time, because doing so wouldn't strengthen their app business. E.g. webrtc. Safari still lags behind many things. When you call people to be careful, you are missing the conflict apple has internally. Between the two, i choose chrome any day of the week because that's what allowed web to progress this fast

So because Apple takes time to add features in a secure, private and efficient way they are being accused of lagging behind standards. And you literally just described the inherent problem. Developers will move to the platform that gives it the most flexibility and features. Users follow. And we end up back in IE days with less diversity and less competition.

That's generous. Apple also ships buggy implementations despite taking more time to ship. Then taking years to fix, if ever. And rarely backporting fixes to older releases.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#74

Post by ThatPlayer »

threeseed wrote: post #9
superb-owl wrote: post #3

The vertical monopolies enjoyed by tech behemoths are absurd. Ever since the Internet Explorer antitrust case [1] it should be clear that things like Apple disallowing other browsers in iOS or Google promoting its own sites in search results are illegal and anticompetitive. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor... .

Apple allows other browsers. They don't allow other browser engines. And I actually don't see how cementing the Chrome engine's dominance on iOS as well as other platforms is good for the web. Because inevitably that is what will happen as just like in the IE days, websites will only work on that browser as it offers the most proprietary features. And why would you develop for multiple browsers when Chrome is availab…

If you believe the only reason people are using and developing for Safari is because of Apple's monopoly, then that's a real cost or harm to users and developers isn't it? Compared to a theoretical or possible cost of a Chrome monopoly that may not happen. And if it does, then that's what antitrust is for.

I don't want to give Apple a monopoly to protect me from a different monopoly. I want to give power to antitrust to protect me from all monopolies, include Apple's and Google's.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#75

Post by encryptluks2 »

logicalmonster wrote: post #66

1) Does anybody have a digestible summary of what the the AICOA actually does and how this law might be abused? In this article they glossed over what effect they think it might have, but I don’t think they simply spelled out what the law actually is, or went over any possible unintended consequences. 2) Whether or not Mozilla’s opinion here is right is something I’m not quite sure about, but what I’m sure about is t…

If Microsoft can use Chromium backend for Edge than so can Mozilla, but here they are complaining that Google needs to allow them to compete. Geezus Mozilla really is something special, and not in a good way.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#77

Post by kevingadd »

logicalmonster wrote: post #66

1) Does anybody have a digestible summary of what the the AICOA actually does and how this law might be abused? In this article they glossed over what effect they think it might have, but I don’t think they simply spelled out what the law actually is, or went over any possible unintended consequences. 2) Whether or not Mozilla’s opinion here is right is something I’m not quite sure about, but what I’m sure about is t…

What do "woke politics" have to do with Mozilla's failure? What is woke about that company to you in particular? Their political leanings are basically unchanged dating back to before Chrome even existed.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#78

Post by encryptluks2 »

threeseed wrote: post #10
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people act like that's some kind of "gotcha"? To me that fact gives it more weight, not less.

Because Google has been the weakest when it comes to privacy measures. And so when you're giving them money, data, traffic and users you're increasing their ability to set the privacy agenda and promoting a single search engine, single browser view of the world. It's hypocritical and short-sighted.

Mozilla is every bit as weak when it comes to privacy defaults.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#79

Post by kevingadd »

encryptluks2 wrote: post #75
logicalmonster wrote: post #66

1) Does anybody have a digestible summary of what the the AICOA actually does and how this law might be abused? In this article they glossed over what effect they think it might have, but I don’t think they simply spelled out what the law actually is, or went over any possible unintended consequences. 2) Whether or not Mozilla’s opinion here is right is something I’m not quite sure about, but what I’m sure about is t…

If Microsoft can use Chromium backend for Edge than so can Mozilla, but here they are complaining that Google needs to allow them to compete. Geezus Mozilla really is something special, and not in a good way.

Why does the world need another Chromium reskin? What's the point of a Firefox that's just Chrome? How is it competing to slap your brand on top of a competitor's product like you're reselling wholesale electronics from an overseas manufacturer?

Look at Edge's market share and explain to me how Mozilla is going to deliver a better Chrome reskin than Microsoft with a tiny fraction of the budget.

Re: Calling for Antitrust Reform

#80

Post by tomComb »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #47
leotravis10 wrote: post #40

This Techdirt piece describes that lawmakers fixed none of the problems and actually exempts a lot of actual monopolies such as telecom (Example: AT&T and Verizon) and retail (Example: Walmart and Target): https://www.techdirt.com/2022/05/27/senator-klobuchar-fixed-...

Techdirt/Copia Institute is a lobbyist which is sponsored by Google. Mike Masnick reads like a Google public policy playbook, because that's what he's copying from.

Any evidence that Google pays masnick or techdirt?
Post reply on HN