5 ms·

Yes, that's exactly the goal. Antitrust laws need to be updated for today's technology and businesses.

scarface74 6y ago
And you trust the current politicians who were more concerned about Big Tech being unfair to conservatives than they were about antitrust. Did anything productive come out of the dog and pony shoe?
- xvector 6y ago
  It is honestly frightening that HN wants to give the government more power over tech after what we've seen from Australia and forced backdoors.
  - Apocryphon 6y ago
    It is honestly frightening that HN wants to give Apple more power over tech after what we've seen from their treatment of HEY, the butterfly keyboard, and the Magic Mouse 2 port.
    - xvector 6y ago
      God forbid a company makes products they want? How is the Magic Mouse 2 hurting you in any way?
      - Apocryphon 6y ago
        https://www.creativebloq.com/news/worst-apple-design-ever https://www.creativebloq.com/news/worst-apple-design-ever
        xvector 6y ago
        Again, neither you nor the government get to force a company into making products you like. Apple does not exist for you or your whims. There are plenty of other mice on the market, and the Magic Mouse 2 isn’t harming you in any way.
        Apocryphon 6y ago
        I actually use a Magic Mouse 2 and am quite satisfied with it, but others disagree. The previous post was obviously a facetious one.
    - scarface74 6y ago
      Yes because Apple with 10% market share in computers has so much power over the computer market. I’m sure the same congress where one of the Senators asked Zuckerberg about why Twitter put Don Jr in time out could design the perfect keyboard and mouse. Basecamp also restricts who can integrate with their platform.
  - d0gbread 6y ago
    It's not "more power over tech," it's the job of government. Distribution of power, promoting competition, tweaking the rules as little as is deemed necessary. Is it really so outrageous to consider there might be a consolidation of power in a way we haven't dealt with before, seeing Amazon crush partners overnight, or Facebook impacting elections? The very same HN that longs for the early internet, with web rings and personality, doesn't have a problem with Google scrapping content from pages you would have otherwise visited, further limiting smaller website's revenue opportunity? For those of you not seeing clear anticompetitive behaviors that warrant discovery -- where is your line?
    - scarface74 6y ago
      Facebook impacted elections for conservatives - the same people that are complaining about an anti conservative bias. What would you propose the government do? Force people not to use FB who willingly go to their site? Have the government say what is and is not allowed on their platform.
      - d0gbread 6y ago
        I don't care who's barking about what and if they're consistent about it. Either there is or is not an underlying risk we should aim to minimize. As far as what I might want to see, since you asked: for one, I would like to see more rigor around the acquisition process to eliminate or even undo some of the consolidation. I won't pretend to understand the details of how or what needs to change, but I am more than open to taking a hard look at things like WhatsApp and Instagram being acquired by Facebook and what kinds of power centralization that enables. I hope smarter people than me will do that research and make intelligible cases so we can all hold evidence-backed positions. Look at the valuation, never mind the societal impact, of these companies -- data is worth far more than your average consumer realizes, at least once it hits an inflection point, and our laws don't currently reflect that. Maybe they should, maybe they shouldn't. I welcome the discovery, and don't feel like we need to be anywhere near a solution yet.
  - wayneftw 6y ago
    Yeah, you’re right...Anybody should be allowed to do anything that they want like on the highway where you’re allowed to just ram your car into other drivers without any consequences.
    - scarface74 6y ago
      Right because ramming your car into someone else is the equivalent of not being able to side load apps on a phone that you don’t have to buy.
      - wayneftw 6y ago
        Right, because that's exactly what I said. The point that you missed, since you're being extremely uncharitable, is that rule by government works more often than it doesn't. Nobody agrees with you here. That's why all of your comments that got any attention are disappearing.
        scarface74 6y ago
        See the “War on Drugs” and the “War on Crime” as counterpoints.
- d0gbread 6y ago
  Yes, very productive things have come out of the dog and pony show: tons of conversation and debate amongst voters as people familiarize themselves with the nuance of these topics. Do I trust the politicians? Maybe not the ones you're describing but read through Elizabeth Warren's proposal around platform utilities: https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big-tech-9ad9e0da324c https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big... Maybe you agree, maybe you don't - the point is that it's clearly a well-articulated position. Not all US politicians are idiots, but the loudest ones certainly make it seem that way.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    Right because a representative who asked Zuckerberg about a Twitter policy is really smart. The very first paragraph she used MS as an example of when the government intervened in tech. How did that work out? Microsoft is still one of the five largest companies in tech and still has the same dominance in PC operating systems and productivity apps.
    - d0gbread 6y ago
      I said "voters are discussing" and you said "representatives are idiots". I'm not sure you're hearing my POV. Stupid questions and ineffective historical decisions or not, are you suggesting we just throw in the towel based on a snapshot of our government? Can we not vote in better representation once the population tears into these issues and better understand the outcomes we want?
      - scarface74 6y ago
        Yes because out of all the issues that voters care about. I’m sure “breaking up big tech” so you can put an emulator on an iPhone ranks above (hopefully my list equally hits conservative and liberal talking points): - gun control - health care - unemployment - “The War on Christmas” - “those evil immigrants who are taking away your jobs” - banning straws so we stop killing fish - free college education The fact is that the only reason $BigTech is $BigTech is because people voluntarily use their products - especially Apple that has a minority market share and charges a premium. Everyone knows how much money they give Apple/Amazon for their products - unlike Facebook and Google.

And you trust the current politicians who were more concerned about Big Tech being unfair to conservatives than they were about antitrust. Did anything productive come out of the dog and pony shoe?

xvector 6y ago
It is honestly frightening that HN wants to give the government more power over tech after what we've seen from Australia and forced backdoors.
- Apocryphon 6y ago
  It is honestly frightening that HN wants to give Apple more power over tech after what we've seen from their treatment of HEY, the butterfly keyboard, and the Magic Mouse 2 port.
  - xvector 6y ago
    God forbid a company makes products they want? How is the Magic Mouse 2 hurting you in any way?
    - Apocryphon 6y ago
      https://www.creativebloq.com/news/worst-apple-design-ever https://www.creativebloq.com/news/worst-apple-design-ever
      - xvector 6y ago
        Again, neither you nor the government get to force a company into making products you like. Apple does not exist for you or your whims. There are plenty of other mice on the market, and the Magic Mouse 2 isn’t harming you in any way.
        Apocryphon 6y ago
        I actually use a Magic Mouse 2 and am quite satisfied with it, but others disagree. The previous post was obviously a facetious one.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    Yes because Apple with 10% market share in computers has so much power over the computer market. I’m sure the same congress where one of the Senators asked Zuckerberg about why Twitter put Don Jr in time out could design the perfect keyboard and mouse. Basecamp also restricts who can integrate with their platform.
- d0gbread 6y ago
  It's not "more power over tech," it's the job of government. Distribution of power, promoting competition, tweaking the rules as little as is deemed necessary. Is it really so outrageous to consider there might be a consolidation of power in a way we haven't dealt with before, seeing Amazon crush partners overnight, or Facebook impacting elections? The very same HN that longs for the early internet, with web rings and personality, doesn't have a problem with Google scrapping content from pages you would have otherwise visited, further limiting smaller website's revenue opportunity? For those of you not seeing clear anticompetitive behaviors that warrant discovery -- where is your line?
  - scarface74 6y ago
    Facebook impacted elections for conservatives - the same people that are complaining about an anti conservative bias. What would you propose the government do? Force people not to use FB who willingly go to their site? Have the government say what is and is not allowed on their platform.
    - d0gbread 6y ago
      I don't care who's barking about what and if they're consistent about it. Either there is or is not an underlying risk we should aim to minimize. As far as what I might want to see, since you asked: for one, I would like to see more rigor around the acquisition process to eliminate or even undo some of the consolidation. I won't pretend to understand the details of how or what needs to change, but I am more than open to taking a hard look at things like WhatsApp and Instagram being acquired by Facebook and what kinds of power centralization that enables. I hope smarter people than me will do that research and make intelligible cases so we can all hold evidence-backed positions. Look at the valuation, never mind the societal impact, of these companies -- data is worth far more than your average consumer realizes, at least once it hits an inflection point, and our laws don't currently reflect that. Maybe they should, maybe they shouldn't. I welcome the discovery, and don't feel like we need to be anywhere near a solution yet.
- wayneftw 6y ago
  Yeah, you’re right...Anybody should be allowed to do anything that they want like on the highway where you’re allowed to just ram your car into other drivers without any consequences.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    Right because ramming your car into someone else is the equivalent of not being able to side load apps on a phone that you don’t have to buy.
    - wayneftw 6y ago
      Right, because that's exactly what I said. The point that you missed, since you're being extremely uncharitable, is that rule by government works more often than it doesn't. Nobody agrees with you here. That's why all of your comments that got any attention are disappearing.
      - scarface74 6y ago
        See the “War on Drugs” and the “War on Crime” as counterpoints.
d0gbread 6y ago
Yes, very productive things have come out of the dog and pony show: tons of conversation and debate amongst voters as people familiarize themselves with the nuance of these topics. Do I trust the politicians? Maybe not the ones you're describing but read through Elizabeth Warren's proposal around platform utilities: https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big-tech-9ad9e0da324c https://medium.com/@teamwarren/heres-how-we-can-break-up-big... Maybe you agree, maybe you don't - the point is that it's clearly a well-articulated position. Not all US politicians are idiots, but the loudest ones certainly make it seem that way.
- scarface74 6y ago
  Right because a representative who asked Zuckerberg about a Twitter policy is really smart. The very first paragraph she used MS as an example of when the government intervened in tech. How did that work out? Microsoft is still one of the five largest companies in tech and still has the same dominance in PC operating systems and productivity apps.
  - d0gbread 6y ago
    I said "voters are discussing" and you said "representatives are idiots". I'm not sure you're hearing my POV. Stupid questions and ineffective historical decisions or not, are you suggesting we just throw in the towel based on a snapshot of our government? Can we not vote in better representation once the population tears into these issues and better understand the outcomes we want?
    - scarface74 6y ago
      Yes because out of all the issues that voters care about. I’m sure “breaking up big tech” so you can put an emulator on an iPhone ranks above (hopefully my list equally hits conservative and liberal talking points): - gun control - health care - unemployment - “The War on Christmas” - “those evil immigrants who are taking away your jobs” - banning straws so we stop killing fish - free college education The fact is that the only reason $BigTech is $BigTech is because people voluntarily use their products - especially Apple that has a minority market share and charges a premium. Everyone knows how much money they give Apple/Amazon for their products - unlike Facebook and Google.