871–880 of 888 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"More room for us to grow."
Grow - why?! So we can be the next company squished by the bureaucrats?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Grow - why?! So we can be the next company squished by the bureaucrats?
The next company to devise new ways to outwit antitrust action via loophole legalities devised by their armies of lawyers funded by all of the money they've made operating in the competitive space cleared out by antitrust action.
Which no startups have. So, antitrust favors incumbents, of course.
> money they've made operating in the competitive space cleared out
Again, not startups. It’s incumbents that take advantage of opportunities like that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Debatable. It's only debatable among people who never built a business in their life, not not among entrepreneurs. > Microsoft falling prey to antitrust only led to a new generation The slap on the wrist Microsoft received with the antitrust action was completely inconsequential on the subject matter (browser bundling) but managed to discourage the company and thus reduced competition exactly when we needed it the…
> It's only debatable among people who never built a business in their life, not not among entrepreneurs. Too bad. Entrepreneurs serve the customers. If you won't build it, we won't go. We shall simply patronize other businesses. > at the onset of the mobile wars which were fought and won by companies already founded at the time of the lawsuit Microsoft was already stumbling in the Ballmer years long before mobile -…
Which won’t be any new business, since you know, no startups. So we’ll patronize whatever state-granted too-big-to-fail monopolist is left and then whine for more regulations when their planes fall from the sky.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The next company to devise new ways to outwit antitrust action via loophole legalities devised by their armies of lawyers funded by all of the money they've made operating in the competitive space cleared out by antitrust action.
> armies of lawyers Which no startups have. So, antitrust favors incumbents, of course. > money they've made operating in the competitive space cleared out Again, not startups. It’s incumbents that take advantage of opportunities like that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's only debatable among people who never built a business in their life, not not among entrepreneurs. Too bad. Entrepreneurs serve the customers. If you won't build it, we won't go. We shall simply patronize other businesses. > at the onset of the mobile wars which were fought and won by companies already founded at the time of the lawsuit Microsoft was already stumbling in the Ballmer years long before mobile -…
> We shall simply patronize other businesses. Which won’t be any new business, since you know, no startups. So we’ll patronize whatever state-granted too-big-to-fail monopolist is left and then whine for more regulations when their planes fall from the sky.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> armies of lawyers Which no startups have. So, antitrust favors incumbents, of course. > money they've made operating in the competitive space cleared out Again, not startups. It’s incumbents that take advantage of opportunities like that.
Startups do not have to worry about such issues until they themselves become incumbents, which they do after the previous incumbents were brought low by antitrust action.
Haha, you’ve never built a startup have you? Try it and let me know how easy it is to become incumbent. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We shall simply patronize other businesses. Which won’t be any new business, since you know, no startups. So we’ll patronize whatever state-granted too-big-to-fail monopolist is left and then whine for more regulations when their planes fall from the sky.
There are also foreign companies which will fill the market need. Also, there are other types of new businesses besides VC-funded startups. We will shop at boutiques and lifestyle businesses.
Incumbents by definition. Besides, crushing your local businesses in favor of foreign competition is not a very smart strategy.
> boutiques and lifestyle businesses
Which are also obeying startups laws and thus are simply not started under an onerous regulatory regime.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Used to be the worlds top supercomputer infra was in national labs or such places and not private companies. Some of the largest are still there. In my hypothetical that would be the case "assuming same resources."
Governments can not compete on infra with trillion dollar computer companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Startups do not have to worry about such issues until they themselves become incumbents, which they do after the previous incumbents were brought low by antitrust action.
> they themselves become incumbents […] after the previous incumbents were brought low by antitrust action Haha, you’ve never built a startup have you? Try it and let me know how easy it is to become incumbent. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are also foreign companies which will fill the market need. Also, there are other types of new businesses besides VC-funded startups. We will shop at boutiques and lifestyle businesses.
> foreign companies Incumbents by definition. Besides, crushing your local businesses in favor of foreign competition is not a very smart strategy. > boutiques and lifestyle businesses Which are also obeying startups laws and thus are simply not started under an onerous regulatory regime.
> Besides, crushing your local businesses in favor of foreign competition is not a very smart strategy.
Customers don’t care.