3 ms·
Because ultimately most people won't care enough to stop going with the cheaper option, especially when all you can point to is negative effects for vendors. It
by johncolanduoni 9y ago
Because ultimately most people won't care enough to stop going with the cheaper option, especially when all you can point to is negative effects for vendors. It's not like Amazon is going around creating spurious libel lawsuits against people for publishing criticism of their business practices, or paying for people to muddy the waters with counter-articles. It's just that the information largely fall on deaf ears. I'm not sure what a judge or moderator would do when there's no real back and forth.
A lot of conduct unbecoming like this becomes public (Intel is a good example). How many people stopped buying their products even with literal judges finding them guilty of some particularly nasty anti-competitive practices?
- toomuchtodo 9y ago> Because ultimately most people won't care enough to stop going with the cheaper option, especially when all you can point to is negative effects for vendors. Indeed. If people could get cheaper clothing if slavery was made legal again, they'd do it in a heartbeat. Witness to a lesser extent the general sentiment on HN that Uber is "helping drivers", when they're indentured servants. I wouldn't call it consumer excess when you're exploiting someone with limited options.