3 ms·

Google/Facebook/Amazon have the power to push any startup competition out of the market in ways that are hard to even enumerate. Think about all of the services

Google/Facebook/Amazon have the power to push any startup competition out of the market in ways that are hard to even enumerate. Think about all of the services, devices, and standards that they control. Watching the fanboys defend their favorite tech giant is incredible. These companies are not behaving in the markets or people's best interest and they are way too big, at a scale that dwarfs most of the worlds organizations.

eanzenberg 8y ago
As long as those services are profitable and they can outcompete startups then there’s nothing illegal or wrong about that. There’s no right that startups need to survive or have bias to succeed.
- wybiral 8y ago
  That really depends on how you interpret the nuance of antitrust law. In the past we've taken a harder stance on giants like this and as a matter of precedence we can do it again.
- piaste 8y ago
  There's no right that tech giants need to be allowed to exist in their current form, either. If a person doesn't break any pre-existing laws, then they must not suffer any legal consequences, sure. And nobody is suggesting that Page and Brin should spend a minute in court or pay a cent in fines. But a corporation isn't a person, it's a business instrument, and if the United States were to judge that the existence of that instrument is detrimental to the greater security / stability / welfare of the nation as a whole, they would have every right to write a new law to ban usage of that instrument, i.e. ban the existence of Google in its current form, as they once wrote a new law to ban the existence of the United Aircraft and Transport Corporation.
  - eanzenberg 8y ago
    In that case, I’d rather err to less govt intervention than more. Govt should be built to write and execute laws, not pick winners.
  - satyrnein 8y ago
    Breaking up a company certainly harms people, by diminishing the value of the company's stock, which is private property. Not only people like Page and Brin, but more sympathetic characters like workers whose retirement funds contain Google stock. This may be worth it for society, but it's a little too convenient to say no people will be harmed.
jhall1468 8y ago
> Watching the fanboys defend their favorite tech giant is incredible. These companies are not behaving in the markets or people's best interest and they are way too big, at a scale that dwarfs most of the worlds organizations. It's not illegal to be big, it's illegal to use your influence to prevent competition in a way that's illegal. There's zero evidence of that, which is why she's talking about a new law. And please refrain from calling those that disagree with you "fanboys". It diminishes every single point you're attempting to make, because you sound like a jaded teenager rather than an adult that wants to have a conversation.
- wybiral 8y ago
  > It's not illegal to be big I never said that it was.
- dbmikus 8y ago
  Google was hit with a big antitrust violation fine in the EU in 2017 for demoting rival shopping services: https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/27/google-fined-e2-42bn-for-eu-antitrust-violations-over-shopping-searches/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/27/google-fined-e2-42bn-for-e...
  - fortenforge 8y ago
    The FTC looked into the same issue and ruled in 2013 that Google did not violate US antitrust laws: https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/public_statements/statement-commission-regarding-googles-search-practices/130103brillgooglesearchstmt.pdf https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/public_sta...

eanzenberg 8y ago

As long as those services are profitable and they can outcompete startups then there’s nothing illegal or wrong about that. There’s no right that startups need to survive or have bias to succeed.

wybiral 8y ago
That really depends on how you interpret the nuance of antitrust law. In the past we've taken a harder stance on giants like this and as a matter of precedence we can do it again.
piaste 8y ago
There's no right that tech giants need to be allowed to exist in their current form, either. If a person doesn't break any pre-existing laws, then they must not suffer any legal consequences, sure. And nobody is suggesting that Page and Brin should spend a minute in court or pay a cent in fines. But a corporation isn't a person, it's a business instrument, and if the United States were to judge that the existence of that instrument is detrimental to the greater security / stability / welfare of the nation as a whole, they would have every right to write a new law to ban usage of that instrument, i.e. ban the existence of Google in its current form, as they once wrote a new law to ban the existence of the United Aircraft and Transport Corporation.
- eanzenberg 8y ago
  In that case, I’d rather err to less govt intervention than more. Govt should be built to write and execute laws, not pick winners.
- satyrnein 8y ago
  Breaking up a company certainly harms people, by diminishing the value of the company's stock, which is private property. Not only people like Page and Brin, but more sympathetic characters like workers whose retirement funds contain Google stock. This may be worth it for society, but it's a little too convenient to say no people will be harmed.

jhall1468 8y ago

> Watching the fanboys defend their favorite tech giant is incredible. These companies are not behaving in the markets or people's best interest and they are way too big, at a scale that dwarfs most of the worlds organizations. It's not illegal to be big, it's illegal to use your influence to prevent competition in a way that's illegal. There's zero evidence of that, which is why she's talking about a new law. And please refrain from calling those that disagree with you "fanboys". It diminishes every single point you're attempting to make, because you sound like a jaded teenager rather than an adult that wants to have a conversation.

wybiral 8y ago
> It's not illegal to be big I never said that it was.
dbmikus 8y ago
Google was hit with a big antitrust violation fine in the EU in 2017 for demoting rival shopping services: https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/27/google-fined-e2-42bn-for-eu-antitrust-violations-over-shopping-searches/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/27/google-fined-e2-42bn-for-e...
- fortenforge 8y ago
  The FTC looked into the same issue and ruled in 2013 that Google did not violate US antitrust laws: https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/public_statements/statement-commission-regarding-googles-search-practices/130103brillgooglesearchstmt.pdf https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/public_sta...