7 ms·

Makes sense. Apple gets sued for charging more than a retailer that owned 90% of the market in an Anti-Trust case and is fined $450 million. Verizon is a commo

Makes sense. Apple gets sued for charging more than a retailer that owned 90% of the market in an Anti-Trust case and is fined $450 million. Verizon is a common carrier that manipulated the traffic in the service it provides from its government granted monopoly for 4 years and is fined 1.350M. This is why people vote donald trump. It is the voting equivalent of YOLO. It's basically the civic equivalent of a weapon, and proving the point that he can get elected may draw into stark contrast that we might need to make a few tweaks here in there with how we operate going forward.

Oletros 11y ago
> Apple gets sued for charging more than a retailer that owned 90% of the market in an Anti-Trust case and is fined $450 million. No, Apple and the publishers were sued for colluding to fix the prices in all the stores, including the ones from Apple, Amazon, B&N or Sony
andrewvc 11y ago
So, you're saying that since there are major issues with the current system the best idea is just to burn it to the ground by electing a reckless maniac? That's just a way to make sure everyone is equally screwed.
- yardie 11y ago
  Like Baltimore, sometimes you have to burn shit to the ground before people start listening. The media didn't care about the peaceful protests over the Freddie Gray murder. But burn 1 CVS down and everyone shows up.
- integraton 11y ago
  > reckless maniac That's an absurdly partisan statement considering his likely opponent is currently under investigation for reckless behavior while serving as a senior government official.
  - ksenzee 11y ago
    His opponent's level of reckless mania is not pertinent here. (Or should that be maniacal recklessness?) Also, there's nothing partisan about Trump-bashing. People from all over the political spectrum have been making common cause over it.
- jessaustin 11y ago
  Historians centuries from now will never understand how the famous and wealthy scion of one of the wealthiest families in the most famous and wealthy city in the world was ever perceived to be a "reckless maniac" outsider. This guy is as inside as inside gets. His entire public persona is a calculated pose. He was recorded saying that he would develop such a persona, were he ever to deign to run for office. A vote for Trump is the opposite of a vote to burn down anything, no matter what the rubes think. If, as seems more and more likely, Trump is elected, I guarantee the following: no "border wall" will be built, the TPP and TTIP will both be ramrodded through, and the "1%" will get even more "1%" than they already are.
  - archgoon 11y ago
    > He was recorded saying that he would develop such a persona, were he ever to deign to run for office. Source? There's a quote about him claiming that he'd "run as a republican, since they're the dumbest voters in the country." but that quote has been debunked. http://www.snopes.com/1998-trump-people-quote/ http://www.snopes.com/1998-trump-people-quote/
hga 11y ago
You left out the little bit about Apple and the publishers, who, as Adam Smith put it in The Wealth of Nations in 1776: "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices."
- enlightenedfool 11y ago
  He defined capitalism.
  - hga 11y ago
    Such conspiracies are not even remotely confined to capitalist systems, this is a problem with human nature that no system is capable of fixing.
- vonklaus 11y ago
  This makes limited sense. While Apple did fix prices, 90% of control of the market of a highly elastic good was controlled by a single entity engaged in dumping, which drove out all other competition. If Adam Smith believed in supply and demand (he did, he wrote the book on it) I think it would be hard to argue that responding to a monopoly with 90% distribution of a good with a price increase would make much sense. Even if we assume that it was only with many big publishers, for a subset of books, and that Barnes and Noble and Borders didn't exist and compete. I would be interested to know if they even made that much in profit. If I could buy a car at 9 out of 10 places I go for $5000, why the fuck would I seek out the one place selling an identical car for $5300? If by chance I didn't shop around, it is likely that I am not motivated by price, and thus descrimination here has a negligible effect. Now that all small book retailers and Borders Books have gone out of business, and Barnes and Noble is quite close we can look back with 100% certainty and say Apple's anti-competitive tactics of meeting a supply flood with increased pricing was the linchpin in their demise. As we know from history, people will hunt for a bad deal, and ruthlessly work against their own self interest even with significant friction.
  - 11y ago
aikah 11y ago
> This is why people vote donald trump I'm sure people vote Donald Trump for many reasons, however I don't really understand the need to insert Trump in this conversation, and given Trump business record he is no stranger to shady business practices. As for Verizon fine vs Apple fine , I'm no lawyer so I don't know what Verizon's case maximum penalty was, though the fine seems quite low. edit: s/tactics/practices
- mikeash 11y ago
  It's just a topical way of saying "this is why people get disenchanted with government." For some people, supporting Trump is just a "screw you" to politics.
  - pklausler 11y ago
    Or to civilization.
  - DanBC 11y ago
    Sure, but look at the shitty sub-thread it's generated.
    - mikeash 11y ago
      Do I have to?
- vonklaus 11y ago
  It is pretty relevent. I am not being sarcastic here, I will elaborate. Outside of the 1970s in switzerland when an influx of capital poured out of Russia into banking safe havens, there has not been many negative interest rates. So typically to get out of a poor economy you employ a range of tactics. Monetary policy being a main one. Of course we can't do that as we can not really lower interest rates as they are essentially 0. This is also a component of the risk free rate, which is essentially negative. Fiscal policy being the other one. However, we don't have money, and since the amount of money in the economy grows exponentially, when you have outsize lending the amount of money gets ratcheted the fuck up. So you have no more levers to pull here. Russia, I beleive their equivalent of secretary of state, that there was "a new cold war", just google that phrase. Also, the people Motherfucking Security Board of the Bulletin of Economic Scientists[0] have set the doomsday clock the closest to midnight it has ever been. recently? no, ever. No one is talking about the ban China just laid down on any foreign entity competing in technology. Happens on Thursday. In a loose interpretation, it would only be all media companies, anyone with published works and media, and any imagery. Darker interpretations have it being interpreted as "publishing" being the app store. However, it is all based on a single reuters qoute and the law which has been published, which you can look up. Then you have US banning china from selling their flagship phone (happened today/yesterday). Unemployment is insane. At this point a rougue agency has near complete control over the entire worlds communications. N. Korea is firing nukes and shit, but honestly that isn't even a big deal at this point. We created a fucking rogue state in the middle east, and hundreds of thousands of people are fucking stampeding through the world to get out of there. Stock market is "up" from the 3.3 TRILLION dollar nose dive the world markets took in the opening 2 months of trading. According to 538[1] it looks like we have effectively grasped this as a nation, and have identified the economy and a poorly run government as the top 2 issues. Now I am about as cynical as they come. However, I am a fucking patriot even with my fairly contrarian views. I refuse to believe that Donald Trump as a person is how the nation succeeds, and I hope most people believe this as well. HOWEVER, the verizon/apple thing (btw just currently going to trial to prevent the governemnt from getting the last 1% of the phone) is indicative of how fucked up everything is. So, yes I do think the election is fairly relevent to this. If you will notice in history, people will put up with horrible consistent conditions, but they do not fare well with uncertainty. So that was my point. [0]http://thebulletin.org/press-release/doomsday-clock-hands-remain-unchanged-despite-iran-deal-and-paris-talks9122 http://thebulletin.org/press-release/doomsday-clock-hands-re... [1]http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/year-ahead-project/#part6 http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/year-ahead-project/#part...
jonknee 11y ago
> Makes sense. Apple gets sued for charging more than a retailer that owned 90% of the market in an Anti-Trust case and is fined $450 million. No, Apple got sued for conspiring with the publishers to raise the prices and force Amazon to rise the prices as well (through agency pricing). The iBookstore has been a near total failure too, so all Apple really accomplished is to make readers pay more for books on Amazon.
- mcphage 11y ago
  > force Amazon to rise the prices as well (through agency pricing). I think those Amazon <---> publisher contracts all got nullified as part of their settlements with the government.
  - hga 11y ago
    As far as I know they're still in effect, those publishers have seen their ebook sales go down substantially, which is blamed on the enforced price increases due to agency pricing. And you'd otherwise see Amazon's return to its old scheme where normal ebooks never cost the consumer more than $9.99, whereas, to take a random example I just looked up, Jim Butcher's latest novel published half a year ago goes for $13.99, ~$1.50 more than the paperback and only ~$2.50 less than the hardback: http://www.amazon.com/Cinder-Spires-Aeronauts-Windlass/dp/0451466802/ http://www.amazon.com/Cinder-Spires-Aeronauts-Windlass/dp/04...
    - mcphage 11y ago
      I'm not finding much in the way of settlement results (overshadowed by similar sounding, more recent news), but articles like this: http://goodereader.com/blog/commentary/agency-pricing-for-ebooks-returns-this-is-a-good-thing http://goodereader.com/blog/commentary/agency-pricing-for-eb... claim that the publishers were forced to abandon the agency model: "When the publishers all settled out of court they were forced to renegotiate their e-book distribution contracts with Amazon, Apple, Barnes and Noble, Kobo, Google and all of the other minor players." That article also says HarperCollins since returned to it, and this one: http://www.digitalbookworld.com/2014/simon-schuster-strikes-amazon-deal-reviving-agency-ebook-pricing/ http://www.digitalbookworld.com/2014/simon-schuster-strikes-... says Simon Schuster returned to it as well. I'm not sure about the others.

Oletros 11y ago

> Apple gets sued for charging more than a retailer that owned 90% of the market in an Anti-Trust case and is fined $450 million. No, Apple and the publishers were sued for colluding to fix the prices in all the stores, including the ones from Apple, Amazon, B&N or Sony

andrewvc 11y ago

So, you're saying that since there are major issues with the current system the best idea is just to burn it to the ground by electing a reckless maniac? That's just a way to make sure everyone is equally screwed.

yardie 11y ago
Like Baltimore, sometimes you have to burn shit to the ground before people start listening. The media didn't care about the peaceful protests over the Freddie Gray murder. But burn 1 CVS down and everyone shows up.
integraton 11y ago
> reckless maniac That's an absurdly partisan statement considering his likely opponent is currently under investigation for reckless behavior while serving as a senior government official.
- ksenzee 11y ago
  His opponent's level of reckless mania is not pertinent here. (Or should that be maniacal recklessness?) Also, there's nothing partisan about Trump-bashing. People from all over the political spectrum have been making common cause over it.
jessaustin 11y ago
Historians centuries from now will never understand how the famous and wealthy scion of one of the wealthiest families in the most famous and wealthy city in the world was ever perceived to be a "reckless maniac" outsider. This guy is as inside as inside gets. His entire public persona is a calculated pose. He was recorded saying that he would develop such a persona, were he ever to deign to run for office. A vote for Trump is the opposite of a vote to burn down anything, no matter what the rubes think. If, as seems more and more likely, Trump is elected, I guarantee the following: no "border wall" will be built, the TPP and TTIP will both be ramrodded through, and the "1%" will get even more "1%" than they already are.
- archgoon 11y ago
  > He was recorded saying that he would develop such a persona, were he ever to deign to run for office. Source? There's a quote about him claiming that he'd "run as a republican, since they're the dumbest voters in the country." but that quote has been debunked. http://www.snopes.com/1998-trump-people-quote/ http://www.snopes.com/1998-trump-people-quote/

hga 11y ago

You left out the little bit about Apple and the publishers, who, as Adam Smith put it in The Wealth of Nations in 1776: "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices."

enlightenedfool 11y ago
He defined capitalism.
- hga 11y ago
  Such conspiracies are not even remotely confined to capitalist systems, this is a problem with human nature that no system is capable of fixing.
vonklaus 11y ago
This makes limited sense. While Apple did fix prices, 90% of control of the market of a highly elastic good was controlled by a single entity engaged in dumping, which drove out all other competition. If Adam Smith believed in supply and demand (he did, he wrote the book on it) I think it would be hard to argue that responding to a monopoly with 90% distribution of a good with a price increase would make much sense. Even if we assume that it was only with many big publishers, for a subset of books, and that Barnes and Noble and Borders didn't exist and compete. I would be interested to know if they even made that much in profit. If I could buy a car at 9 out of 10 places I go for $5000, why the fuck would I seek out the one place selling an identical car for $5300? If by chance I didn't shop around, it is likely that I am not motivated by price, and thus descrimination here has a negligible effect. Now that all small book retailers and Borders Books have gone out of business, and Barnes and Noble is quite close we can look back with 100% certainty and say Apple's anti-competitive tactics of meeting a supply flood with increased pricing was the linchpin in their demise. As we know from history, people will hunt for a bad deal, and ruthlessly work against their own self interest even with significant friction.
- 11y ago

aikah 11y ago

> This is why people vote donald trump I'm sure people vote Donald Trump for many reasons, however I don't really understand the need to insert Trump in this conversation, and given Trump business record he is no stranger to shady business practices. As for Verizon fine vs Apple fine , I'm no lawyer so I don't know what Verizon's case maximum penalty was, though the fine seems quite low. edit: s/tactics/practices

mikeash 11y ago
It's just a topical way of saying "this is why people get disenchanted with government." For some people, supporting Trump is just a "screw you" to politics.
- pklausler 11y ago
  Or to civilization.
- DanBC 11y ago
  Sure, but look at the shitty sub-thread it's generated.
  - mikeash 11y ago
    Do I have to?
vonklaus 11y ago
It is pretty relevent. I am not being sarcastic here, I will elaborate. Outside of the 1970s in switzerland when an influx of capital poured out of Russia into banking safe havens, there has not been many negative interest rates. So typically to get out of a poor economy you employ a range of tactics. Monetary policy being a main one. Of course we can't do that as we can not really lower interest rates as they are essentially 0. This is also a component of the risk free rate, which is essentially negative. Fiscal policy being the other one. However, we don't have money, and since the amount of money in the economy grows exponentially, when you have outsize lending the amount of money gets ratcheted the fuck up. So you have no more levers to pull here. Russia, I beleive their equivalent of secretary of state, that there was "a new cold war", just google that phrase. Also, the people Motherfucking Security Board of the Bulletin of Economic Scientists[0] have set the doomsday clock the closest to midnight it has ever been. recently? no, ever. No one is talking about the ban China just laid down on any foreign entity competing in technology. Happens on Thursday. In a loose interpretation, it would only be all media companies, anyone with published works and media, and any imagery. Darker interpretations have it being interpreted as "publishing" being the app store. However, it is all based on a single reuters qoute and the law which has been published, which you can look up. Then you have US banning china from selling their flagship phone (happened today/yesterday). Unemployment is insane. At this point a rougue agency has near complete control over the entire worlds communications. N. Korea is firing nukes and shit, but honestly that isn't even a big deal at this point. We created a fucking rogue state in the middle east, and hundreds of thousands of people are fucking stampeding through the world to get out of there. Stock market is "up" from the 3.3 TRILLION dollar nose dive the world markets took in the opening 2 months of trading. According to 538[1] it looks like we have effectively grasped this as a nation, and have identified the economy and a poorly run government as the top 2 issues. Now I am about as cynical as they come. However, I am a fucking patriot even with my fairly contrarian views. I refuse to believe that Donald Trump as a person is how the nation succeeds, and I hope most people believe this as well. HOWEVER, the verizon/apple thing (btw just currently going to trial to prevent the governemnt from getting the last 1% of the phone) is indicative of how fucked up everything is. So, yes I do think the election is fairly relevent to this. If you will notice in history, people will put up with horrible consistent conditions, but they do not fare well with uncertainty. So that was my point. [0]http://thebulletin.org/press-release/doomsday-clock-hands-remain-unchanged-despite-iran-deal-and-paris-talks9122 http://thebulletin.org/press-release/doomsday-clock-hands-re... [1]http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/year-ahead-project/#part6 http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/year-ahead-project/#part...

jonknee 11y ago

> Makes sense. Apple gets sued for charging more than a retailer that owned 90% of the market in an Anti-Trust case and is fined $450 million. No, Apple got sued for conspiring with the publishers to raise the prices and force Amazon to rise the prices as well (through agency pricing). The iBookstore has been a near total failure too, so all Apple really accomplished is to make readers pay more for books on Amazon.

mcphage 11y ago
> force Amazon to rise the prices as well (through agency pricing). I think those Amazon <---> publisher contracts all got nullified as part of their settlements with the government.
- hga 11y ago
  As far as I know they're still in effect, those publishers have seen their ebook sales go down substantially, which is blamed on the enforced price increases due to agency pricing. And you'd otherwise see Amazon's return to its old scheme where normal ebooks never cost the consumer more than $9.99, whereas, to take a random example I just looked up, Jim Butcher's latest novel published half a year ago goes for $13.99, ~$1.50 more than the paperback and only ~$2.50 less than the hardback: http://www.amazon.com/Cinder-Spires-Aeronauts-Windlass/dp/0451466802/ http://www.amazon.com/Cinder-Spires-Aeronauts-Windlass/dp/04...
  - mcphage 11y ago
    I'm not finding much in the way of settlement results (overshadowed by similar sounding, more recent news), but articles like this: http://goodereader.com/blog/commentary/agency-pricing-for-ebooks-returns-this-is-a-good-thing http://goodereader.com/blog/commentary/agency-pricing-for-eb... claim that the publishers were forced to abandon the agency model: "When the publishers all settled out of court they were forced to renegotiate their e-book distribution contracts with Amazon, Apple, Barnes and Noble, Kobo, Google and all of the other minor players." That article also says HarperCollins since returned to it, and this one: http://www.digitalbookworld.com/2014/simon-schuster-strikes-amazon-deal-reviving-agency-ebook-pricing/ http://www.digitalbookworld.com/2014/simon-schuster-strikes-... says Simon Schuster returned to it as well. I'm not sure about the others.