4 ms·
What if the platform strategy is inherently flawed from the perspective of a public good, and is inherently monopolistic and anticompetitive? How does this not
by taurath 5y ago
What if the platform strategy is inherently flawed from the perspective of a public good, and is inherently monopolistic and anticompetitive? How does this not reach the absolute definition of a de facto monopoly, especially if you’ve read about the powers that monopolies already broken up we’re using to keep theirs? No monopoly ever will admit it is one.
I would like to see a world where platforms are forcibly opened - it seems like any downside could be easily mitigated with competition or regulation. If Apple wants to be a privacy platform great. But they don’t get to take an arbitrary cut out of every companies bottom line with no recourse because they own the hardware. I think anyone saying the potential bad effects don’t have enough imagination as to how well things can work when everything isn’t owned by one company. You could even argue it’s anti capitalist if you wanted.
- grishka 5y ago> they own the hardware They don't — the users bought it, it's theirs now. It should be illegal to restrict hardware like this.
- taurath 5y agoMeant to say they build the hardware. Quite agree.
- anonymouse008 5y agoSo when you buy a vehicle, you should be allowed to run any custom OSS on the hardware?
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y agoI believe that you are already allowed to do whatever you want on your property but if you want to drive it on public roads you need to comply with some minimal safety standards imposed by the state.
- anonymouse008 5y agoAt what point do we look at the internet as public roads? With the recent ransomwares, the line appears to be shifting.
- grishka 5y agoWhy not? It's your property. Though it's your responsibility to not endanger other people with your actions.
- BenjiWiebe 5y agorusEFI.com