8 ms·

I would take Warren more seriously if she started out by talking about ATT/VZN/Comcast. The "big tech" companies have the potential to harm consumers, but telco

I would take Warren more seriously if she started out by talking about ATT/VZN/Comcast. The "big tech" companies have the potential to harm consumers, but telcos have been harming consumers for decades.

dgacmu 7y ago
To her credit, she gets net neutrality: https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-floor-speech-on-vote-to-save-net-neutrality https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senato...
- jessaustin 7y ago
  "...under this administration the FCC has become a puppet for giant internet providers." If she actually believed this, it would be a fundamental misunderstanding of FCC. FCC helps monopolies and hurts consumers because that is its purpose, since 1934. Neither Democrats nor Republics have ever done anything to change this. Net neutrality is a fine network policy, but it wouldn't need to be mandated by regulation if actual competition existed in this market. FCC throughout its history has acted mostly to prevent such competition.
  - dgacmu 7y ago
    That's an oversimplification that ignores the fact that spectrum allocation is useful. very few things in politics are completely black and white as you presented them.
geofft 7y ago
By harming do you mean on price? Big tech has the potential to harm through externalities (privacy, control of the media, etc.). A sufficiently free market - with appropriate safeguards to ensure competition and prevent regulatory capture - tends to deal with price just fine, but not with externalities. Warren's argument here is a straightforward free market one: free markets only work when there's a free flow of information. If Amazon both runs the market and participates in it, it's an inherently unfair playing field. Her argument is not that we should break up companies that we don't like or even those that hurt consumers; her argument is we should break up companies whose intact existence threatens the fundamental nature of free markets. All that said, as it happens, she opposed Comcast's attempt to buy Fox https://thehill.com/policy/technology/396559-senate-dems-urge-justice-department-to-review-comcast-bid-for-fox https://thehill.com/policy/technology/396559-senate-dems-urg... and the T-Mobile / Sprint merger https://thehill.com/policy/technology/429618-dem-senators-urge-fcc-justice-department-to-reject-t-mobile-sprint-merger https://thehill.com/policy/technology/429618-dem-senators-ur... — opposing both on the grounds that they're anticompetitive.
- utopian3 7y ago
  Telco’s have harmed privacy by sharing location data tracking, and adding injections to web traffic
  - jhanschoo 7y ago
    > adding injections to web traffic to substantiate this point: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15890551 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15890551
- basch 7y ago
  The Amazon argument is that they shouldnt be able to sell a store brand and rank it higher than a competing third party product. Should grocery stores and Wal-Mart not be able to sell store brands? Should Xbox Live and Playstation Network not be able to sell first and third party titles? I think the argument is stronger against hardware manufacturers locking down their devices to only first party app stores, than against regular shopping. If I buy a phone from Apple I can only run the apps they approve, and when they stop supporting the OS, the phone doesnt unlock and allow me to install my own OS. Apple can obsolete hardware by strongarming a lack of updates to crucial banking and communication apps.

dgacmu 7y ago

To her credit, she gets net neutrality: https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-floor-speech-on-vote-to-save-net-neutrality https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senato...

jessaustin 7y ago
"...under this administration the FCC has become a puppet for giant internet providers." If she actually believed this, it would be a fundamental misunderstanding of FCC. FCC helps monopolies and hurts consumers because that is its purpose, since 1934. Neither Democrats nor Republics have ever done anything to change this. Net neutrality is a fine network policy, but it wouldn't need to be mandated by regulation if actual competition existed in this market. FCC throughout its history has acted mostly to prevent such competition.
- dgacmu 7y ago
  That's an oversimplification that ignores the fact that spectrum allocation is useful. very few things in politics are completely black and white as you presented them.

geofft 7y ago

By harming do you mean on price? Big tech has the potential to harm through externalities (privacy, control of the media, etc.). A sufficiently free market - with appropriate safeguards to ensure competition and prevent regulatory capture - tends to deal with price just fine, but not with externalities. Warren's argument here is a straightforward free market one: free markets only work when there's a free flow of information. If Amazon both runs the market and participates in it, it's an inherently unfair playing field. Her argument is not that we should break up companies that we don't like or even those that hurt consumers; her argument is we should break up companies whose intact existence threatens the fundamental nature of free markets. All that said, as it happens, she opposed Comcast's attempt to buy Fox https://thehill.com/policy/technology/396559-senate-dems-urge-justice-department-to-review-comcast-bid-for-fox https://thehill.com/policy/technology/396559-senate-dems-urg... and the T-Mobile / Sprint merger https://thehill.com/policy/technology/429618-dem-senators-urge-fcc-justice-department-to-reject-t-mobile-sprint-merger https://thehill.com/policy/technology/429618-dem-senators-ur... — opposing both on the grounds that they're anticompetitive.

utopian3 7y ago
Telco’s have harmed privacy by sharing location data tracking, and adding injections to web traffic
- jhanschoo 7y ago
  > adding injections to web traffic to substantiate this point: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15890551 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15890551
basch 7y ago
The Amazon argument is that they shouldnt be able to sell a store brand and rank it higher than a competing third party product. Should grocery stores and Wal-Mart not be able to sell store brands? Should Xbox Live and Playstation Network not be able to sell first and third party titles? I think the argument is stronger against hardware manufacturers locking down their devices to only first party app stores, than against regular shopping. If I buy a phone from Apple I can only run the apps they approve, and when they stop supporting the OS, the phone doesnt unlock and allow me to install my own OS. Apple can obsolete hardware by strongarming a lack of updates to crucial banking and communication apps.