4 ms·

So punish smaller European firms first just to not give the impression that it's anti-US? Or go after the companies actually doing it at scale and owning most o

So punish smaller European firms first just to not give the impression that it's anti-US? Or go after the companies actually doing it at scale and owning most of the market? What irrationality, twisting everything to be some secret anti-US agenda than to just assume/see the obvious that the big players are the big offenders and they happen to be US players (for now).

manfredo 7y ago
> So punish smaller European firms first just to not give the impression that it's anti-US? Yes, go fine every other company that throttled processor clock rates when battery power supply was low. Apply the law equally and that would convince me that this isn't discriminatory enforcement. The reality is that this would never be carried out, since effectively every phone, tablet, or laptop maker would be fined. Throttling processor clock rates when battery voltage is low is something that every good electronics manufacturer does. Because if they didn't your device would stop working when the battery is old, close to discharged, too cold, or more. By throttling clock rates, the phone still functions but with a slower clock rate. The user impact is strictly better (a slowdown vs. a crash or not even being able to boot). Every mobile device manufacturer did (and still does) do the same thing that Apple did to its iPhones.
tripzilch 7y ago
They actually said anti "non European", not anti-US. And it is anti-US for the very practical reason that FAANG and the rest, are all gigantic US corporations that consistently keep pushing the limits of EU regulations, abuse market dominance and won't listen to advisory rulings until years later it becomes law and they scream bloody free market. It's not like many EU companies do that. And when they do, they also get fined, but they don't cry about it as much.

4 ms·

So punish smaller European firms first just to not give the impression that it's anti-US? Or go after the companies actually doing it at scale and owning most o

by pergadad 7y ago

manfredo 7y ago
> So punish smaller European firms first just to not give the impression that it's anti-US? Yes, go fine every other company that throttled processor clock rates when battery power supply was low. Apply the law equally and that would convince me that this isn't discriminatory enforcement. The reality is that this would never be carried out, since effectively every phone, tablet, or laptop maker would be fined. Throttling processor clock rates when battery voltage is low is something that every good electronics manufacturer does. Because if they didn't your device would stop working when the battery is old, close to discharged, too cold, or more. By throttling clock rates, the phone still functions but with a slower clock rate. The user impact is strictly better (a slowdown vs. a crash or not even being able to boot). Every mobile device manufacturer did (and still does) do the same thing that Apple did to its iPhones.
tripzilch 7y ago
They actually said anti "non European", not anti-US. And it is anti-US for the very practical reason that FAANG and the rest, are all gigantic US corporations that consistently keep pushing the limits of EU regulations, abuse market dominance and won't listen to advisory rulings until years later it becomes law and they scream bloody free market. It's not like many EU companies do that. And when they do, they also get fined, but they don't cry about it as much.