Editorial: Senator Warren's stance on big tech breakup is dangerous politics

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 95
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,087member
    sacto joe said:
    Let’s be honest here: Senator Warren was wrong to lump Apple in with the rest of the gang. And she’s wrong to say or even imply that sheer size defines morality.

    But she’s not wrong about tech abuse being prevalent, up to and including it’s manipulation by inimicable foreign powers.

    So all this crap about how she’s a lousy choice for President is more down to folks who, for one reason or another, don’t want her to be President. Speaking objectively, compared to a piece of work like Donald Trump she’s as pure as the driven snow.

    If folks are truly serious about criticising Senator Warren’s POV, then you’ll know who they are, because they’ll be the ones not attacking her personally.

    ’Nuff said.
    Sen. Warren has been really wrong about big issues, not just this one. Her policies, if enacted, would result in economic ruin for the US. This includes the extremely poorly thought out “Green New Deal”. The swing to far-Left positions by Democrats (not just Warren, but Harris, Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez and more) is baffling. It seems like they are dead set on offending as many people as they can right now.
  • Reply 62 of 95
    normangnormang Posts: 74member
    Aren't things expensive enough now? At what point do things stop going up, if wages continued to increase, two things happen. people lose jobs, witness the useless $15 hour wage fight, many people got the pay raise, either lost the job eventually, or they lost hours, because business could not afford the cost. The perpetual rise in of many other costs, are tied to wage increases, as well as other factors.. Government makes this worse by forcing wage increases or regulations,... You wonder why college is so expensive, its because of the mindset that everyone needs a college degree and government pays for it, and now its so watered down, its almost meaningless and super expensive to boot..
    edited March 13 SpamSandwichbshank
  • Reply 63 of 95
    heli0s said:
    In 2019 America only 2-3 major companies dominate every major economic sector, from ecommerce to air travel, to the TV shows you watch - if think that's good for consumers, you're massively ignorant of both economics and history. Tech monopolies are no different than monopolies in any other sphere - there is a point when too big is bad for consumers and the company itself. Monopolies have no interest in innovation, they have an interest in rent-seeking.

    As an Apple-focused site, look no further than the keyboard issues of recent Macs. If you want macOS, there is ONE company that makes it. So take that shitty keyboard or go use Windows. Real choice!
      Your comments reveal your ignorance of economics and business.  Why is it that most sectors have two to three major players and a lot of smaller ones? It’s the result of intense competition where the best emerge from the masses.   And having three big players is not a monopoly by any reasonable definition.  

      Besides as the article mentions, some companies dominate because they are just better at delivering service and products to the consumer and that’s a win win. A true monopoly can only exist for an extended period of time when it’s protected by the govt. otherwise competition will emerge to challenge them.   Look at Microsoft from the 1990’s, many thought they would dominate for decades because of their 90+% market share in PC OS but 10 years later they were playing catch up because of the internet and notice Microsoft isn’t even mentioned by Sen. Warren because they are no longer a dominant player. 

      I have absolutely zero faith in govt being able to solve these type of problems but total faith in the market, which is the people, to solve them.   The market works in the open and adapts to fix the problem whereas govt uses force, coercion and secret backroom deals.   

    I ask you, is not the govt nothing but a group of powerful special interest groups who really have zero interest in our well being but only in the power they wield over us.  
    SpamSandwichbshank
  • Reply 64 of 95
    I think the  blanket statement by Warren proves how niave she it about tech.  A couple of posts here mention the AT&T breakup and, while I believe overall it was a good thing, it did not come without costs.  The current SPAM call epidemic we are seeing could have its roots in the breakup since AT&T no longer controls end to end security.  This allows caller ID spoofing and making the originator of the calls difficult to trace hence the many we get. My point is tech is complicated and a simple blanket “cure” could cause more problems than it creates. Oh and any product a company produces has certain limitations. For example, I might like the design of the Ford Explorer but the economy of a Chevy engine but I am forced to choose one or the other because I can’t have a Chevy engine in a Ford (disclaimer: I not saying a Chevy engine is more economical than a Ford one, am using it for illustration purposes).
    bshank
  • Reply 65 of 95
    normmnormm Posts: 566member
    Sen. Warren has been really wrong about big issues, not just this one. Her policies, if enacted, would result in economic ruin for the US. This includes the extremely poorly thought out “Green New Deal”. The swing to far-Left positions by Democrats (not just Warren, but Harris, Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez and more) is baffling. It seems like they are dead set on offending as many people as they can right now.
    I'm very disappointed in Warren for lumping Apple in here and for overgeneralizing. This initiative may well cost her the nomination.  But I think you have to listen to a lot of right-wing media to get the impression that the rest of her ideas, and those of the other so-called "leftists" running, are extreme or crazy.  People who get their information from conspiracy theories and pundits working for coal companies, instead of scientists and actual experts, are the ones who are crazy.  None of the people you name do that -- their ideas come from mainstream economics and science.  If that offends people, the problem is not their ideas.  

    Warren is one of the leading bankruptcy experts in the world, and her textbooks are widely used.  Her stances on what causes inequality and lack of opportunity in America are extremely well founded and are supported by most people who've spent a lot of time studying the subject.  And the Green New Deal is not even a proposal yet, but just a commitment to propose to do something serious on a problem that is going to swamp us soon.  The US intelligence establishment isn't exactly left leaning, and they're in the forefront of giving the warning.  Sticking our fingers in our ears and yelling about how outrageous it is for anyone to do anything to encourage us to limit the damage we're doing is not helpful.

  • Reply 66 of 95
    Really AI? An editorial on this is fine (it’s your website), allowing comments probably isn’t. AI always turns off comments for anything vaguely political - why leave them on now?
  • Reply 67 of 95
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,820member
    Nilay Patel gave (I thought) a decent and quite nuanced take on this on the latest episode of Vector.  Much better than most of the spluttering and harrumphing going on in here.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IR3MolusotE
  • Reply 68 of 95
    gilly33gilly33 Posts: 245member
    genovelle said:
    heli0s said:
    In 2019 America only 2-3 major companies dominate every major economic sector, from ecommerce to air travel, to the TV shows you watch - if think that's good for consumers, you're massively ignorant of both economics and history. Tech monopolies are no different than monopolies in any other sphere - there is a point when too big is bad for consumers and the company itself. Monopolies have no interest in innovation, they have an interest in rent-seeking.

    As an Apple-focused site, look no further than the keyboard issues of recent Macs. If you want macOS, there is ONE company that makes it. So take that shitty keyboard or go use Windows. Real choice!
    There is one company that makes Samsung TVs, One Company that makes Sony Devices etc. they all run their own software. Apple tried the software licensing route and it was end by Steve Jobs when he returned because it nearly bankrupted the company. Why should they cheapen their system with garbage Hardware like windows supports. Just like you don’t like Apples keyboards, they are far more who do. So you have choice. You can alway by an external keyboard too. Good luck. 
    Thank you cause I don’t know what stupid nonsense heli0s was spouting.
  • Reply 69 of 95
    All Warren did was latch onto a hot button issue of the day (Facebook are evil spies who sell your secret life details) and make it a marketing point of her campaign.

    Is it out of touch? Of course. It's basically swatting a gnat then swallowing a camel. 

    She proposes to do some good by destroying successful hard work and giftedness. 

    I do feel that tech companies can have an overreach, but breaking them up is not the answer. Consumer-protective laws are. Basically telling a company that is prying "you can't do that and if you do, there will be real consequences." Simple. but most of these politicians are more worried about themselves than the people. so they create a big mess out of a simple issue in order to create a platform out of it. 

    The government needs to figure itself out as well. Too many soap opera wannabe stars with personal agendas where we need humble, hardworking servants of the people. 
  • Reply 70 of 95
    lmaclmac Posts: 187member
    I'm pretty liberal leaning, but I think Warren is off the mark here. Microsoft didn't get broken up in the '90s but they have become a shadow of their former selves. What I don't like is companies like Amazon bullying municipalities into tax breaks in exchange for jobs. Tax them appropriately and let the market decide who wins and loses.
  • Reply 71 of 95
    bulk001bulk001 Posts: 478member
    I could be wrong but I believe that Warren’s issue is with the App Store and that you can’t load anything onto an iPhone without the developers having to submit to the rules Apple makes and pay them up to 30% of your revenue if you sell your apps. If Apple only policed for privacy and security it would be one thing but they have a “morals police” that decides what content is appropriate (which apparently is an issue with some of the TV shows they are making too) and they prevent apps from improving on their functionality (for instance not allowing anything on the home screen or people creating their own Apple Watch faces). It’s like Windows only coming with IE or buying a car and only being allowed to buy the gas from a Ford service station or only getting your service there (a few years ago car manufacturers didn’t want to give repair shops access to diagnostic codes to force everyone to use their repair shops but were quickly shut down.) I should be able to download an app right from the Netflix site and make my payment from there without Apple interfering with that transaction. 
    edited March 13
  • Reply 72 of 95
    chasmchasm Posts: 1,515member
    lkrupp said:
    Amusing to me how liberal politicians are so eager to limit the size and power of corporations in the name of the people but think a giant, all powerful, all knowing, all controlling government is just fine. In fact the bigger the better as far as the size and influence of government with types like Warren.  
    I'm just going to mention that the last two presidents who actually shrank the size of government where named Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Look it up yourself -- the size of government grew under the Bushes, and typically grows under other Republican administrations. To his credit, Trump has not grown the size of government during his first two years in office, but neither has he substantially shrunk it.
    bulk001
  • Reply 73 of 95
    chasmchasm Posts: 1,515member
    I've been generally impressed with Sen. Warren's strongly pro-consumer stance on things, but I think this proposal is fundamentally wrong-headed. The problem with Amazon, Google, and FB isn't that they're "too big," it's that those three in particular (as pointed out in the article) do an utterly terrible job with your security, privacy, and data. The United States needs *loads* more security/privacy regulation, and the GDPR adopted by Europe is a pretty good model of how that problem should be tackled.

    Whether you generally like Warren or don't, this proposal as she has articulated it so far just seems capriciously and arbitrarily anti-big company and anti-tech. For someone who's railed against the big banks (with plenty more factual ammunition in terms of evidence of wrong-doing), she's no longer talking about breaking them up, even though they are the ones that caused the last recession. Nor is she writing a Medium post about how it's time to break up Walmart, which is every bit as large and abusive as Amazon.

    As a publicity stunt, this seems ill-thought-out and poorly researched (especially when you include Apple). As a realistic proposal, it has absolutely zero chance of actually being enacted. It's waaay too early for "silly season" type campaign rhetoric.
    bulk001
  • Reply 74 of 95
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,566administrator
    Really AI? An editorial on this is fine (it’s your website), allowing comments probably isn’t. AI always turns off comments for anything vaguely political - why leave them on now?
    For the last six months, we've started with everything open. Threads have only been closed after they've become not cost-effective to moderate anymore.

    Some haven't lasted long.
    edited March 13 DAalseth
  • Reply 75 of 95
    neutrino23neutrino23 Posts: 1,528member
    lkrupp said:
    Amusing to me how liberal politicians are so eager to limit the size and power of corporations in the name of the people but think a giant, all powerful, all knowing, all controlling government is just fine. In fact the bigger the better as far as the size and influence of government with types like Warren.  
    There is a big difference between corporations and our government. In principle, our government is us and is accountable to the voters. It is not some independent entity. If we don't like how things are going we can vote and change the leadership, as we did last November. We can show up at government offices and complain, as many did during the health care debates. Try showing up at the offices of the CEO of United Healthcare or Cigna and you'll get arrested. Warren's comments are rather broad brush, maybe necessary given the short attention span of media these days, but she is raising some important issues.
    bulk001
  • Reply 76 of 95
    lkrupp said:
    Amusing to me how liberal politicians are so eager to limit the size and power of corporations in the name of the people but think a giant, all powerful, all knowing, all controlling government is just fine. In fact the bigger the better as far as the size and influence of government with types like Warren.  
    That's because the government is suppose to be by the people and working for the people. Corporations currently are by the few, and working against the many! Rarely are the interests of the corporation in line with the interests of the people at large. The government is suppose to be the tool of the people (not a tool of the corporations) as _we_ are the rightfull owners of this country and the corporations only exist because we the _people_ grant them the ability to exist and do business here. The government needs to be more powerful than the corporations in order to provide the necessary oversight at the peoples will.

    People forget that _we_ the people, own this country. Corporations are but tenants that exist only because we grant then permission to operate. Corporations are not people!! The people, through its agent the government, define and create the sandbox by which the economic engine of capitalism exists. When corporations become so large that they userp our right or ability to govern ourselves and by extension the corporations, it's time to place limits on these corporations.

    -Progressive Capitalist-
    bulk001
  • Reply 77 of 95
    mrshowmrshow Posts: 151member
    Ugh terrible article. And naive and ill informed points. Of course big companies need to be broken up, it's good for competition, it's good for consumers, and it's good for workers. Other big companies, energy and Internet access to name two, need to nationalized. 
    DAalseth
  • Reply 78 of 95
    mrshow said:
    Ugh terrible article. And naive and ill informed points. Of course big companies need to be broken up, it's good for competition, it's good for consumers, and it's good for workers. Other big companies, energy and Internet access to name two, need to nationalized. 
    Nationalization is a terrible idea! Internet access needs to have more ... capitalism for it to work. We should never have allowed the companies to merge. mergers are in general _very bad_ and have little not no benefit (in most examples) to anyone except the companies themselves. It's better to let one of the companies to go out of business and let the void be filled by new blood! That's evolution!
  • Reply 79 of 95
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,087member
    krreagan2 said:
    mrshow said:
    Ugh terrible article. And naive and ill informed points. Of course big companies need to be broken up, it's good for competition, it's good for consumers, and it's good for workers. Other big companies, energy and Internet access to name two, need to nationalized. 
    Nationalization is a terrible idea! Internet access needs to have more ... capitalism for it to work. We should never have allowed the companies to merge. mergers are in general _very bad_ and have little not no benefit (in most examples) to anyone except the companies themselves. It's better to let one of the companies to go out of business and let the void be filled by new blood! That's evolution!
    You prefer a country where one company could never acquire or merge with or spinoff another company? We have a constitutionally protected right of private property ownership. Corporations/companies are private property. 

    You need to rethink your position on this.
  • Reply 80 of 95
    Uninformed politicians shooting blind claims against core of platform security, sole and well controlled App Store. NO one else can control it! They should focus on Facebook and similar companies raiding on user data without rules.
Sign In or Register to comment.