7 ms·

I think i see a pattern: WhatsApp: circumvent cellphone texting charges Airbnb: circumvent hotel laws Uber: circumvent taxi laws Amazon: circumvent state ta

I think i see a pattern: WhatsApp: circumvent cellphone texting charges Airbnb: circumvent hotel laws Uber: circumvent taxi laws Amazon: circumvent state taxes Facebook: circumvent people's anonymity online Google: circumvent copyrights (take people's content slap on ads)

pjc50 9y ago
Of those description, whatsapp is the one that's actually the classic "how capitalism is supposed to work": provide a comparable or better service for a lower price. Amazon's era of sales tax evasion is mostly over. And if anyone is monetising copyright infringement it's not Google (who are somewhat conscientious about this after some lawsuits) but Tumblr (literally made of copyright infringing photos)
- kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
  You mean the Sears-Roebuck era of tax evasion.
  - pjc50 9y ago
    I meant something very specific: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/24/the-holiday-is-over-amazon-will-collect-sales-taxes-nationwide-on-april-1.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/24/the-holiday-is-over-amazon-w... (The era of Amazon posting things from Jersey to UK and other destinations for similar reasons ended ages ago) I was also restricting myself to the question of sales taxes; tax evasion/avoidance among the internet tech monoliths is a wider question.
- ghaff 9y ago
  Lot of this is that Amazon has a physical nexus in most states or wants to. (And the situation with affiliates is murky.) So not much point in resisting at this point at their scale. Almost no other company collects sales tax for out-of-state sales where they don't have a physical retail location although buyers are theoretically on the hook for reporting it during tax season.
- cookiecaper 9y ago
  Google (meaning Google.com, the search engine) is a flagrant copyright violator and the only reason they weren't shut down is that they became too important too fast for the judges to be willing to rule anything other than "Yes fair use works for everything they do, please don't hurt me for breaking the internet". Many smaller groups were shut down by Lady Justice for behavior very similar to Google's.
bwb 9y ago
I do not see it, i just see huge value to society with each.
- wpietri 9y ago
  As an aside, "I don't see X, therefore X is irrelevant/meaningless" is an argument whose relevance hinges on the speaker being all-seeing, all-knowing. That's always seemed an odd take to me. When somebody sees something that I don't, my goal is to see it.
tedunangst 9y ago
One of those is not like the others.
zeroxfe 9y ago
Or less cynically: WhatsApp: cheap plentiful messaging Airbnb: cheap plentiful vacation rentals Uber: cheap plentiful taxis Amazon: cheap plentiful stuff Facebook: ... umm i'm sure there's something here ... Google: cheap plentiful access to information All of these disrupt the slow-moving complacent dinosaurs of the past.
- wpietri 9y ago
  And one of the interesting questions for me is "where does 'cheap' come from"? In the case of WhatsApp, it came from telco monopolies overcharging for a particular use of data. I'm certainly ok with that. And I was initially excited about Airbnb, rideshare, etc, because some of the cheap comes from finding underutilized resources (an apartment that happened to be empty for a few weeks, people who were going somewhere anyhow) and putting them to work. But I find the second-order effects fascinating. Certainly some of Airbnb and Uber's cheapness comes from dodging regulation and shifting costs onto other people. "Privatize the gains, socialize the losses" is undeniably a lucrative business strategy, but it's not one I particularly want to celebrate.
  - wyager 9y ago
    > "Privatize the gains, socialize the losses" is undeniably a lucrative business strategy, but it's not one I particularly want to celebrate. This doesn't describe anything that AirBnB or Uber are doing. Taxis were expensive and horrible because governments created artificial scarcity via taxi medallion systems. They were "socializing the gains", to build off your aphorism. Uber re-privatized the gains by circumventing this ridiculous system, and we're all much better for it. "Socializing the losses" refers to groups getting bailed out on taxpayer dime when they fail, and nothing even resembling that has happened with AirBnB or Uber.
    - quadrige 9y ago
      Airbnb socializes the costs by transfering them to the flat owners (cleaning etc.), and Uber to the drivers (fuel, maintenance etc.)
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
hn_throwaway_99 9y ago
Your list is preposterous. Even if you take all your other items at face value, you make it sound like "circumventing cellphone texting charges" is breaking the law or something, as if ridiculous texting charges are set up for the good of anyone besides big telcos.
- fwdpropaganda 9y ago
  It's not preposterous, it's exactly right. SMS text messages were a something like $15bn industry before whatsapp got between them and the customers, and that has value.
  - hammock 9y ago
    What about imessage?
    - helloindia 9y ago
      Only on iOS. Doesn't have the same impact as WhatsApp.
  - hn_throwaway_99 9y ago
    The list is preposterous because the title was "I think I see a pattern", and all the other examples given were breaking laws or some other nefarious goal (and I'd emphasize those other examples were clearly taken from the point of view that these companies were doing something bad). The implication was that "circumventing texting charges" was somehow stealing from telcos.
wyager 9y ago
You can't just slap the word "circumvent" onto a bunch of vastly different concepts and expect us to believe they are all similar.
candiodari 9y ago
It's weird, you hit the nail on the head in your first line, then skip the essentials on the next line. WhatsApp: circumvent cellphone texting charges, making texting cheaper Airbnb: circumvent hotel laws, making staying anywhere cheaper Uber: circumvent taxi laws, making taxis and flexible transport cheaper Amazon: circumvent state taxes (and VAT, until recently, and still the case in Europe, Australia and I'm sure many other jurisdictions), making getting mail-order goods cheaper PS for Amazon: and also making mail-order a great deal faster. PPS for Amazon: also cut out many middlemen to make things cheaper. Facebook: make advertising to particular groups, accurately identified, a LOT cheaper Google: Make it a lot cheaper to find things online. But Why stay in tech ? Aldi + their discounter competitors: Make groceries a lot cheaper by cutting out the middleman GE, in their day: Make lighting and anything that could be done cheaper electrically a lot cheaper. Or possible at all in the first place. VW, in their day: make owning a car a lot cheaper. GDF/Suez: make transporting goods from Europe to Asia a lot faster (but mostly cheaper). Keep in mind Jevon's paradox. Cheaper does not just mean cheaper, as in less dollars. It also means that whatever becomes cheaper becomes more ubiquitous. Faster. Becomes accessible for more people, either in difficult geographies, or poor, or ... It also means those things become feasible to use for various purposes that they couldn't be used for before. It means a lot more of said good/service will get used. And so on and so forth. You want to make $1 million ? Become great in a particular subject, and consult. You want to make $10-$100 million ? Start a company with a niche product, and do it really well. Want to make $100 million - $1 billion ? Start a company and bribe the government, so that it either pays you directly or forces loads of people to pay for your services (lots of these in Washington and Brussels) You want to make $1-$10 billion ? Make some stupid ubiquitous product cheaper. Think the most moronic normal things in existence. Breakfast cereal. Grapes. Web search.

pjc50 9y ago

Of those description, whatsapp is the one that's actually the classic "how capitalism is supposed to work": provide a comparable or better service for a lower price. Amazon's era of sales tax evasion is mostly over. And if anyone is monetising copyright infringement it's not Google (who are somewhat conscientious about this after some lawsuits) but Tumblr (literally made of copyright infringing photos)

kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
You mean the Sears-Roebuck era of tax evasion.
- pjc50 9y ago
  I meant something very specific: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/24/the-holiday-is-over-amazon-will-collect-sales-taxes-nationwide-on-april-1.html https://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/24/the-holiday-is-over-amazon-w... (The era of Amazon posting things from Jersey to UK and other destinations for similar reasons ended ages ago) I was also restricting myself to the question of sales taxes; tax evasion/avoidance among the internet tech monoliths is a wider question.
ghaff 9y ago
Lot of this is that Amazon has a physical nexus in most states or wants to. (And the situation with affiliates is murky.) So not much point in resisting at this point at their scale. Almost no other company collects sales tax for out-of-state sales where they don't have a physical retail location although buyers are theoretically on the hook for reporting it during tax season.
cookiecaper 9y ago
Google (meaning Google.com, the search engine) is a flagrant copyright violator and the only reason they weren't shut down is that they became too important too fast for the judges to be willing to rule anything other than "Yes fair use works for everything they do, please don't hurt me for breaking the internet". Many smaller groups were shut down by Lady Justice for behavior very similar to Google's.

bwb 9y ago

I do not see it, i just see huge value to society with each.

wpietri 9y ago
As an aside, "I don't see X, therefore X is irrelevant/meaningless" is an argument whose relevance hinges on the speaker being all-seeing, all-knowing. That's always seemed an odd take to me. When somebody sees something that I don't, my goal is to see it.

tedunangst 9y ago

One of those is not like the others.

zeroxfe 9y ago

Or less cynically: WhatsApp: cheap plentiful messaging Airbnb: cheap plentiful vacation rentals Uber: cheap plentiful taxis Amazon: cheap plentiful stuff Facebook: ... umm i'm sure there's something here ... Google: cheap plentiful access to information All of these disrupt the slow-moving complacent dinosaurs of the past.

wpietri 9y ago
And one of the interesting questions for me is "where does 'cheap' come from"? In the case of WhatsApp, it came from telco monopolies overcharging for a particular use of data. I'm certainly ok with that. And I was initially excited about Airbnb, rideshare, etc, because some of the cheap comes from finding underutilized resources (an apartment that happened to be empty for a few weeks, people who were going somewhere anyhow) and putting them to work. But I find the second-order effects fascinating. Certainly some of Airbnb and Uber's cheapness comes from dodging regulation and shifting costs onto other people. "Privatize the gains, socialize the losses" is undeniably a lucrative business strategy, but it's not one I particularly want to celebrate.
- wyager 9y ago
  > "Privatize the gains, socialize the losses" is undeniably a lucrative business strategy, but it's not one I particularly want to celebrate. This doesn't describe anything that AirBnB or Uber are doing. Taxis were expensive and horrible because governments created artificial scarcity via taxi medallion systems. They were "socializing the gains", to build off your aphorism. Uber re-privatized the gains by circumventing this ridiculous system, and we're all much better for it. "Socializing the losses" refers to groups getting bailed out on taxpayer dime when they fail, and nothing even resembling that has happened with AirBnB or Uber.
  - quadrige 9y ago
    Airbnb socializes the costs by transfering them to the flat owners (cleaning etc.), and Uber to the drivers (fuel, maintenance etc.)

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

hn_throwaway_99 9y ago

Your list is preposterous. Even if you take all your other items at face value, you make it sound like "circumventing cellphone texting charges" is breaking the law or something, as if ridiculous texting charges are set up for the good of anyone besides big telcos.

fwdpropaganda 9y ago
It's not preposterous, it's exactly right. SMS text messages were a something like $15bn industry before whatsapp got between them and the customers, and that has value.
- hammock 9y ago
  What about imessage?
  - helloindia 9y ago
    Only on iOS. Doesn't have the same impact as WhatsApp.
- hn_throwaway_99 9y ago
  The list is preposterous because the title was "I think I see a pattern", and all the other examples given were breaking laws or some other nefarious goal (and I'd emphasize those other examples were clearly taken from the point of view that these companies were doing something bad). The implication was that "circumventing texting charges" was somehow stealing from telcos.

wyager 9y ago

You can't just slap the word "circumvent" onto a bunch of vastly different concepts and expect us to believe they are all similar.

candiodari 9y ago

It's weird, you hit the nail on the head in your first line, then skip the essentials on the next line. WhatsApp: circumvent cellphone texting charges, making texting cheaper Airbnb: circumvent hotel laws, making staying anywhere cheaper Uber: circumvent taxi laws, making taxis and flexible transport cheaper Amazon: circumvent state taxes (and VAT, until recently, and still the case in Europe, Australia and I'm sure many other jurisdictions), making getting mail-order goods cheaper PS for Amazon: and also making mail-order a great deal faster. PPS for Amazon: also cut out many middlemen to make things cheaper. Facebook: make advertising to particular groups, accurately identified, a LOT cheaper Google: Make it a lot cheaper to find things online. But Why stay in tech ? Aldi + their discounter competitors: Make groceries a lot cheaper by cutting out the middleman GE, in their day: Make lighting and anything that could be done cheaper electrically a lot cheaper. Or possible at all in the first place. VW, in their day: make owning a car a lot cheaper. GDF/Suez: make transporting goods from Europe to Asia a lot faster (but mostly cheaper). Keep in mind Jevon's paradox. Cheaper does not just mean cheaper, as in less dollars. It also means that whatever becomes cheaper becomes more ubiquitous. Faster. Becomes accessible for more people, either in difficult geographies, or poor, or ... It also means those things become feasible to use for various purposes that they couldn't be used for before. It means a lot more of said good/service will get used. And so on and so forth. You want to make $1 million ? Become great in a particular subject, and consult. You want to make $10-$100 million ? Start a company with a niche product, and do it really well. Want to make $100 million - $1 billion ? Start a company and bribe the government, so that it either pays you directly or forces loads of people to pay for your services (lots of these in Washington and Brussels) You want to make $1-$10 billion ? Make some stupid ubiquitous product cheaper. Think the most moronic normal things in existence. Breakfast cereal. Grapes. Web search.