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

Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

ustr.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 119 posts

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#81

Post by asveikau »

dictum wrote: post #42
asveikau wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, good sir, for confirming everything I was saying. (It's funny that you begin by assuming I am unfamiliar with such positions. Thinking they are goofy, humorous and exaggerated is very different from never having been exposed to them. It was exactly this exposure that compelled me to write this, even knowing that it would be a target of downvotes and flames.)

"Action against regulation of large corporations with good relationships with the government" is only a subset of "action against regulation of business".

A subset is still included in the larger set. So thank you for agreeing with me.

PS: I don't think the "good relationships with government" have been established to be causal to the result, beyond vague innuendo.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#82

Post by voodoo123 »

ruswick wrote: post #56
voodoo123 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Utterly false. Apple is not a lobbying juggernaut at all and spends less on lobbying than any of the other major tech companies: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76073.html Apple is also taking a serious beating from Obama's DOJ. So clearly not 'a favorite' of the governments.

Entirely incorrect. Evidently, you neglected to read the details of the article. First, Samsung isn't mentioned at all, so there's no context for this specific debate. The fact that Microsoft or IBM gave more money to government officials means absolutely nothing when someone is trying to to decide between Apple and Samsung. Moreover, this article pertains only to a three month period. You can't possibly pretend that…

Nope. I was replying to the idea that Apple is a 'lobbying juggernaut' and 'government favorite' which is demonstrably false.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#83

Post by voodoo123 »

rustynails wrote: post #75
Terretta wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple is a lobbying juggernaut Wrong. Apple's not even in the top ten tech companies. In 2012, Google spent $18M while Apple spent $1.9M, less than Google, Microsoft, Hp, Oracle, IBM, Facebook, Intel, Cisco, Amazon, and Dell. Handy chart: http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/02/18/apple-reduced-fede... Key quotes: "Apple has historically spent less than its rivals on government lobbying" and "Apple's lobbying effort…

Slightly off topic, but lobbying includes companies lobbying against NSA privacy contentions, so lobbying by the $ is not a good measure of wanting a "self licking icecream".

In that case Apple has still 'lobbied' far less than its US competitors by holding out against prism.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#84

Post by voodoo123 »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #46
voodoo123 wrote: post #45

Judging by the comments here, people on HN hate Apple more than they hate patents. Incidentally - for those suggesting that Apple should get a taste of its own medicine, what on earth are you talking about? Since when did Apple have competitors products banned?

Is this a joke?

Is that a point?

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#85

Post by 3327 »

bdcravens wrote: post #51
3327 wrote: post #12

This is the most misleading headline I have seen.

You obviously haven't been on HN very long :-)

Almost a year mostly interested in actual hack threads and python threads. and pro keeping HN, HN, despise reddit style posts as there is a place for that and its called Reddit !

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#86

Post by rhizome »

sillysaurus wrote: post #68
rhizome wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's that many of us don't agree with how commerce and government actually work together.

Care to expand?

Sure: government will always be two-faced with respect to "free" markets, interfering where it suits their and/or their friends/benefactors' interests, or not, as the case may be. It has been this way for centuries, Adam Smith just added to the lexicon of rationales.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#87

Post by northwest »

mtgx wrote: post #15
revelation wrote: post #6

What a joke. So good to see the president is finally tackling the patent abuses, by protecting local trolls from a taste of their very own medicine. (The justification here being that this ban is not "in the interest of the public". If this was considered in ay other cases, we'd all be paying cents for generics from India instead of thousands of millions for the brand version)

This is what increasingly bothers me lately about the decisions they make. They're sacrificing a lot of stuff "in the interest of public good". It seems like a lot of collectivism. "We can't put bankers in prison because this way it's better for the public/the economy" "We can't punish any corporation with more than a relatively minor fine, because that would hurt the public" "We can't let a judge's decision about ba…

It's really just about the money/power and influential people sharing it among them and protecting it.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#88

Post by sillysaurus »

rhizome wrote: post #86
sillysaurus wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to expand?

Sure: government will always be two-faced with respect to "free" markets, interfering where it suits their and/or their friends/benefactors' interests, or not, as the case may be. It has been this way for centuries, Adam Smith just added to the lexicon of rationales.

Well, in what way was Apple the government's friend or benefactor?

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#89

Post by coldtea »

mtgx wrote: post #15
revelation wrote: post #6

What a joke. So good to see the president is finally tackling the patent abuses, by protecting local trolls from a taste of their very own medicine. (The justification here being that this ban is not "in the interest of the public". If this was considered in ay other cases, we'd all be paying cents for generics from India instead of thousands of millions for the brand version)

This is what increasingly bothers me lately about the decisions they make. They're sacrificing a lot of stuff "in the interest of public good". It seems like a lot of collectivism. "We can't put bankers in prison because this way it's better for the public/the economy" "We can't punish any corporation with more than a relatively minor fine, because that would hurt the public" "We can't let a judge's decision about ba…

>This is what increasingly bothers me lately about the decisions they make. They're sacrificing a lot of stuff "in the interest of public good". It seems like a lot of collectivism.

That's nothing like "collectivism". Notice how in all this cases you state "the public" is just a pretext, and those who would indeed lose are the fat cats: bankers, corporations, Apple, etc.

That's plain and simple market capitalism: the big money gets its own laws (aka "the golden rule": those with gold make the rules).

In "collectivism" (in the USSR sense) the power lies in the state/government, for the benefit of the party officials.

In market capitalism, the power lies in the big money, and the government works for the benefit of large private interests.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#90

Post by asveikau »

johngalt wrote: post #60
asveikau wrote: post #4

I know political discussion on HN is frowned upon by some, but I get amused thinking of hypothetical reaction from the president's opponents. This seems to be an action against regulation of business, but it's the Obama administration, therefore... Communism! Apple is in the tank for Obamacare!

Please explain how this instance of the government choosing winners and losers arbitrarily is pro free market? Creating arbitrary rules that don't apply to businesses who are serving the 'public interest' (politically connected) is only one step away from a planned economy.

My reading of the source material is that the administration is blocking an instance of a government entity "picking winners and losers". If you take off your John Galt Goggles maybe you would parse it that way too.
Post reply on HN