5 ms·

All you're telling me is that there are no choices that you like. All of those are viable choices (except the ones that literally don't exist anymore), and ther

All you're telling me is that there are no choices that you like. All of those are viable choices (except the ones that literally don't exist anymore), and there were many more viable choices before FAANG began their dominance that consumers saw and abandoned in favor of the dominant products we have today. Not that I don't know how you feel, there are areas where I hate all the options too. I don't always get what I want, that's life. It would be perverse for me to force legions of others to dedicate their efforts towards what I would like instead.

xvector 6y ago
That was really well phrased - there are options, but just because you don’t like them doesn’t mean you get to force other people to make something you do like.
- mrgordon 6y ago
  I didn't say people should be forced to make something. I was responding to the other person's argument that you can simply not buy products like Apple's to show you don't like their lack of openness. My point was that all of the available products have different drawbacks so its not so simple as "don't buy Apple" when there are only a few options left from monopolies and they all have similar issues.
- elsurudo 6y ago
  But on the other hand if a majority of us feel this way and the free market doesn’t seem to be doing the job, then that is the job of government and regulation - that is our voice.
- politician 6y ago
  Of course, an obvious counter-example is the Defense Production Act, which allows the government to force other people to make something they like.
mrgordon 6y ago
No. You said "just don't buy it" if you don't like it. But I need a smartphone. So I'm going to buy one. My point is if they all have different drawbacks (this one is better for "openness", that one is better for privacy, this one is better for security) then saying people should just not buy Apple to protest one decision isn't helpful. Because by doing that I would probably end up needing to buy an Android phone which means I would give up other things like privacy. And then if I mention that you'll say we should have just not bought Google phones. Well yeah. But yeah they control the market. So you buy the least evil product you can that is fairly priced and works with all your other stuff. Or just blame the consumer cause they didn't choose the mythical Linux phone with great battery life and no spyware.
- themacguffinman 6y ago
  Again, you just don't like your options. You've decided that our modern smartphones are evil and also decided that you must have a smartphone. I'm not here to tell you that you should have just not bought X phone, I'm here to tell you that you have a choice as a consumer to buy what you want, and if you don't want anything available, that's not anyone's problem. For millions of consumers, an Android phone or iPhone or Samsung phone is a great option and is largely what they really want. The phones that people buy today are phones that most people have repeatedly chosen over others, including some phones you may have liked. Sorry you don't like the current choices, society has never owed anyone a mythical Linux phone. If you want something that doesn't exist, make it yourself or convince other consumers to buy it as well so companies find it worth their while. Go buy Purism. Don't whine to the government that it's not fair you can't get a mythical Linux phone.
  - mrgordon 6y ago
    Lol I never whined about not getting a mythical Linux phone. I don't even want one particularly. My point was that your claim to "just not buy it" doesn't work when its an essential item in modern society like food, water, housing, or a computer. Its easy to sit here from your armchair and say "well if dumb consumers hadn't bought smartphones like this then we wouldn't have them so they shouldn't complain." But you, of course, have a smartphone from one of these manufacturers because like everyone else you realized you basically need one these days if you work or travel. We created rules that favor tech mega corps and now they dominate the industry. So your "solution" isn't really a solution. You say people should have made some amazingly insightful decision to boycott all smartphones fifteen years ago but since they didn't we are stuck with the brands we have and its the consumers' fault...
politician 6y ago
Our governments are empowered to change behaviors by threat of force, but we're letting corporations conduct an authoritarian insurgency within our national borders while libertarian apologists cry "free markets" and "consumer choice". There is no choice and the markets for highly sophisticated technologies are not free or efficient. It's farcical.
- themacguffinman 6y ago
  If the government really believed that FAANG is conducting an authoritarian insurgency within our national borders, they wouldn't be pursuing antitrust. If that's what you want to argue, fine, but it's not relevant to antitrust action discussed here. There is plenty of choice, many of which I'm happy with and many of which I'm not. I think it's farcical to say that there is no choice, millions of consumers have chosen freely without coercion from many options. The choices we have today are options that consumers have chosen willingly and repeatedly over other options that no longer exist.

xvector 6y ago

That was really well phrased - there are options, but just because you don’t like them doesn’t mean you get to force other people to make something you do like.

mrgordon 6y ago
I didn't say people should be forced to make something. I was responding to the other person's argument that you can simply not buy products like Apple's to show you don't like their lack of openness. My point was that all of the available products have different drawbacks so its not so simple as "don't buy Apple" when there are only a few options left from monopolies and they all have similar issues.
elsurudo 6y ago
But on the other hand if a majority of us feel this way and the free market doesn’t seem to be doing the job, then that is the job of government and regulation - that is our voice.
politician 6y ago
Of course, an obvious counter-example is the Defense Production Act, which allows the government to force other people to make something they like.

mrgordon 6y ago

No. You said "just don't buy it" if you don't like it. But I need a smartphone. So I'm going to buy one. My point is if they all have different drawbacks (this one is better for "openness", that one is better for privacy, this one is better for security) then saying people should just not buy Apple to protest one decision isn't helpful. Because by doing that I would probably end up needing to buy an Android phone which means I would give up other things like privacy. And then if I mention that you'll say we should have just not bought Google phones. Well yeah. But yeah they control the market. So you buy the least evil product you can that is fairly priced and works with all your other stuff. Or just blame the consumer cause they didn't choose the mythical Linux phone with great battery life and no spyware.

themacguffinman 6y ago
Again, you just don't like your options. You've decided that our modern smartphones are evil and also decided that you must have a smartphone. I'm not here to tell you that you should have just not bought X phone, I'm here to tell you that you have a choice as a consumer to buy what you want, and if you don't want anything available, that's not anyone's problem. For millions of consumers, an Android phone or iPhone or Samsung phone is a great option and is largely what they really want. The phones that people buy today are phones that most people have repeatedly chosen over others, including some phones you may have liked. Sorry you don't like the current choices, society has never owed anyone a mythical Linux phone. If you want something that doesn't exist, make it yourself or convince other consumers to buy it as well so companies find it worth their while. Go buy Purism. Don't whine to the government that it's not fair you can't get a mythical Linux phone.
- mrgordon 6y ago
  Lol I never whined about not getting a mythical Linux phone. I don't even want one particularly. My point was that your claim to "just not buy it" doesn't work when its an essential item in modern society like food, water, housing, or a computer. Its easy to sit here from your armchair and say "well if dumb consumers hadn't bought smartphones like this then we wouldn't have them so they shouldn't complain." But you, of course, have a smartphone from one of these manufacturers because like everyone else you realized you basically need one these days if you work or travel. We created rules that favor tech mega corps and now they dominate the industry. So your "solution" isn't really a solution. You say people should have made some amazingly insightful decision to boycott all smartphones fifteen years ago but since they didn't we are stuck with the brands we have and its the consumers' fault...

politician 6y ago

Our governments are empowered to change behaviors by threat of force, but we're letting corporations conduct an authoritarian insurgency within our national borders while libertarian apologists cry "free markets" and "consumer choice". There is no choice and the markets for highly sophisticated technologies are not free or efficient. It's farcical.

themacguffinman 6y ago
If the government really believed that FAANG is conducting an authoritarian insurgency within our national borders, they wouldn't be pursuing antitrust. If that's what you want to argue, fine, but it's not relevant to antitrust action discussed here. There is plenty of choice, many of which I'm happy with and many of which I'm not. I think it's farcical to say that there is no choice, millions of consumers have chosen freely without coercion from many options. The choices we have today are options that consumers have chosen willingly and repeatedly over other options that no longer exist.