Last Active
  • Lack of 'creativity and enthusiasm' prevented big tech antitrust law overhaul

    physguy said:
    It would be nice the the interviewee actually said something substantive. “ They've been allowed to acquire competitors, destroy competitors, favor their own goods and services, engage in very anti-competitive conduct”. Every company in the world does that. It’s called competition and running a business, successfully. It’s only deigned to be a problem when one company has a monopolistic position in a given market. No where in this article, and presumably in the interviewee’s responses do they address why any of these companies are monopolies, and in what market. I believe a good argument can be made that Google is a monopoly in search, that FB is in social media. Beyond that I don’t see it for the tech companies. Amazon certainly isn’t in online retail as there are numerous competitors large and small. Walmart is a significantly bigger company in retail than Amazon. Apple certainly is not a monopoly in phones or apps as they remain the smaller player in both markets. They just provide such service that they get the profitable sectors of those markets. AWS might be in web services,  but I doubt it given google, Microsoft, Salesforce, Rackspace, etc. 

    When politicians say this stuff, they're not looking to make a substantive argument. For that matter, there isn't a lick of proof that Apple or other tech companies acquired competitors simply for the purpose of destroying competition. But that doesn't matter to them. They're trying to appeal to emotion-in this case, anger. They are trying to get people like you and me to get angry at tech companies. They're trying to arouse the inner bloodlust in us. An informed populace that exercises critical thinking and understands business is their worst enemy.
  • Spotify, Tile, and Match Group call Apple anticompetitive at Senate hearing

    dpkroh said:
    Everyone here claiming Apple is right, boo hoo for the others, does not understand the differences between capitalism, competition, and free markets.  They are aso poor students of 20th century American history and the incomparable prosperity of the mid 20th century, that is no more.  That prosperity only happened once the government started breaking up large companies and monopolies.  Apple, Google, FaceBook, and the like are the "Robber Barrons" of the 21st century.  Real prosperity can only return when the government does what it did post WWII. Take down and break up the robber barons to restore free markets and completion, and restore equitable (not equal but equitable) wealth distribution.

    Capitalism and competition are NOT the same same. The goal of capitalism is profit maximization. That goal is ultimately incompatible with competition.  Profit maximization, unbridled, has the ultimate goal of destroying all current and future competition, to forever protect its monopoly at all costs. 

    Equal access competition a.k.a. truly free markets are the true drivers of innovation and prosperity.  Capitalism is simultaneously the best tool to maximize productivity, and simultaneously the greatest threat to the same, when left unmanaged.

    Free markets and competition are good for everyone, except for greed maxing capitalists.  Any capitalist that has amassed enough power or wealth to bully competition, no longer sees competition and free markets as beneficial.  They see competition and free markets as a threat to their dominance. 

    The greatest expansion of wealth in American history, occurred just after WWII, when the government went after big corporations and broke them up.  Everyone won.  Wealth was spread far more evenly and equitable and more wealth was generated than when a few big corporations controlled all.

    Now we are back to a few big corporations controlling almost everything, especially in technology.  I'm always amazed at how easy it is to train the vast majority of people to act against their own self interest.  That's the most effective and insidious form of power there is.  That is the sort of control that the system has against everyone here cheering on Apple, Google, and the like, while denigrating the others.  it's just like the first line of the chorus of the song "Banditos" by "The Refreshments".   Everybody knows the world is full of "them".

    It sounds like you believe that big corporations in itself is a bad thing, and I fully respect your opinion. However, I disagree. I believe that in addition to whether a corporation is big, how that corporation came to be big and/or be the dominant player in the market is an important consideration. To me, there is a big difference between a corporation that makes a better mousetrap and a corporation that prices its competitors out of the market and then jacks up its prices after everyone else goes out of business. 
  • DOJ formalizes request for encryption back-doors

    gatorguy said:
    rob53 said:
    ITGUYINSD said:
    Good ol' Bill Barr.  Can't wait until JAN 2021.  Buh-bye!
    I don't think that this viewpoint that the DOJ has presented is going to change, regardless of who's in charge.
    You can think that all you want but Barr is not your normal AG. Once he's gone, we can start clearing out the garbage and make sure the people who get installed are following the Constitution and laws, something Barr doesn't know anything about.
    This didn't start with Barr. The Obama administration attempted to do it too a decade ago. Maybe 2010 Obama and his 2015 FBI didn't know anything about the Constitution and laws either, certainly believable. 

    You're right this didn't start with Barr. But what makes this administration's attitude so puzzling is that this administration is unabashedly in support of gun rights. This administration refuses to endorse gun control of any kind on principle on the grounds that gun control encumbers law-abiding citizens' right to bear arms. The Obama administration was not so anti-gun control

    It never ceases to amaze me that an administration that is so worried about creating encumbrances on our right to bear arms would openly support encumbering our right to privacy and our right to safeguard our electronic communications.
  • Elizabeth Warren confirms Apple is on her big tech breakup list

    bulk001 said:
    I think she is right. Apple needs to allow 3rd parties to install apps without having to use the AppStore or pay Apple the tax. They could do it like they do with the Mac - install at your own risk from outside sources and call Warren if you get compromised for support.
    Why does Apple need to allow 3rd parties to install apps through channels other than the App Store? They're free to buy other phones if they want the freedom to install other apps. Many people are fond of pointing out that the iPhone is an inferior phone but it just happens to have a bunch of sheeple who want to shell out money for it. If that's the case, instead of wasting time demanding that Apple let in other apps, why not buy a phone that's superior to the iPhone and have all that freedom?
  • Elizabeth Warren confirms Apple is on her big tech breakup list

    jblank said:
    Screw her, AOC, who thinks the country is barely above garbage, and the rest of these collectivist leftists that want to destroy our economic system and many great companies, Apple included.

    The Democrat Party has turned into a race towards Communism. They are radical and have the gas pedal planted to the firewall to see who can go furthest left. I'm surprised they haven't called for gulags and re-education camps for white males yet, I guess that's coming soon though.
    I don't agree with Warren one bit and if she makes the ticket, the Democrats will lose my vote but let's face the facts. Republicans are just as capable of government overreach as Democrats. Let's not forget that Donald Trump and many Republicans called for regulating tech and social media companies like Google or Facebook because they allegedly favored left-leaning content. Donald Trump claimed without a lick of proof that Google intentionally engineered its search algorithm to make posts critical of him appear at the top of results and called for an investigation in response. Trump also repeatedly said Amazon would have a lot of problems if he became President during his campaign. I think I've made my point.

    The real problem is populism. Left-wing or right-wing, populism has unintended consequences. People like Warren are the result.