3 ms·

Suppose google's chrome started charging websites 30% of their revenue to be accessible in their browser. Is this an abuse of monopoly? Yes. The issue is HNer'

Suppose google's chrome started charging websites 30% of their revenue to be accessible in their browser. Is this an abuse of monopoly? Yes. The issue is HNer's are still living in the "website era" of the internet -- that's ending. We're now in the app era. And devices are the browsers. Their app stores are monopolies on their devices; in that the person who controls the road is a monopolist, despite the existence of air travel. That android devices compete with ios devices is irrelevant, in as much as comcast/et al. can say, "go to a different state". The app store is an iOS monopoly -- the hardware apple provides is a road/telephone/browser device for access apps -- the new predominant mode of social/economic communication & infrastructure.

roenxi 5y ago
> Is this an abuse of monopoly? Yes. It isn't though. That is my point, monopoly doesn't just mean big market share + you don't like it. Half the web would go dark to Chrome and everyone would dump the browser in a couple of months if they pulled a stunt like that. Because they don't have monopoly. They only have a very high market share because Chrome is the best browser. If the best-browser part stops being true there is not reason for the highest market share part to stay true.
- mjburgess 5y ago
  Well I take 'monopoly' to be a pretheoretical concept tied to the moral concequentialist justification of markets: aggregate social benefits. Ie., a monopoly is whatever situation gives rise to a situation where a company can set prices without regards to legitimate competitive market processes. Where 'legitimate' is effectively a concequentialist constraint concerning aggregate consumer benefit. There are many theories of /when/ a company is a monopoly; including very narrow case law definitions around pricing. The pretheoretical use of the term however is taken to permit a broader scope. And lets be clear: a 30pc surcharge on all our economic activity (whether that be a mastercard or an apple) given no market justification has no justification. Let there be many app stores on the iphone-- and we shall see what the market price on an app store. If it ends up being 30% then theres no objection.
- feanaro 5y ago
  > They only have a very high market share because Chrome is the best browser. This is very much a matter of opinion, not something you can reasonably state with a straight face. A large part of Chrome's large market share is the fact that it comes installed as a default on more than half the world's phones and that it's heavily marketed by the world's largest search engine and video hosting website (owned by the same entity!). It also good enough, for now. It has nothing to do with it being the best, though.
pjmlp 5y ago
> Their app stores are monopolies on their devices; in that the person who controls the road is a monopolist, despite the existence of air travel. Not when there are other roads to be taken, regardless of how many pot holes they have on them. So buy another device, a feature phone, give money to Jolla, FairPhone, whatever.
- mjburgess 5y ago
  airplanes exist, and theyre owned by a baron too
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  "So buy another device, a feature phone, give money to Jolla, FairPhone, whatever." You are peddling a fantasy - my bank has mobile only access, and the app wont work on any alternative you lifted. The UK goverment app to apply for riggt to resde for European immigrants won't work either. What the fuck am i meant to do with those phones?
  - pjmlp 5y ago
    Switch bank if that is so important to you. I only use banks that provide access via ATM and Web, in addition to apps.
    - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
      Should I also switch countries? I cant uproot my entire life just to spite google
      - pjmlp 5y ago
        You don't need to switch country to spite Google, only be more clever with your options and vote with your wallets. I still carry my Windows Phone around.

roenxi 5y ago

> Is this an abuse of monopoly? Yes. It isn't though. That is my point, monopoly doesn't just mean big market share + you don't like it. Half the web would go dark to Chrome and everyone would dump the browser in a couple of months if they pulled a stunt like that. Because they don't have monopoly. They only have a very high market share because Chrome is the best browser. If the best-browser part stops being true there is not reason for the highest market share part to stay true.

mjburgess 5y ago
Well I take 'monopoly' to be a pretheoretical concept tied to the moral concequentialist justification of markets: aggregate social benefits. Ie., a monopoly is whatever situation gives rise to a situation where a company can set prices without regards to legitimate competitive market processes. Where 'legitimate' is effectively a concequentialist constraint concerning aggregate consumer benefit. There are many theories of /when/ a company is a monopoly; including very narrow case law definitions around pricing. The pretheoretical use of the term however is taken to permit a broader scope. And lets be clear: a 30pc surcharge on all our economic activity (whether that be a mastercard or an apple) given no market justification has no justification. Let there be many app stores on the iphone-- and we shall see what the market price on an app store. If it ends up being 30% then theres no objection.
feanaro 5y ago
> They only have a very high market share because Chrome is the best browser. This is very much a matter of opinion, not something you can reasonably state with a straight face. A large part of Chrome's large market share is the fact that it comes installed as a default on more than half the world's phones and that it's heavily marketed by the world's largest search engine and video hosting website (owned by the same entity!). It also good enough, for now. It has nothing to do with it being the best, though.

pjmlp 5y ago

> Their app stores are monopolies on their devices; in that the person who controls the road is a monopolist, despite the existence of air travel. Not when there are other roads to be taken, regardless of how many pot holes they have on them. So buy another device, a feature phone, give money to Jolla, FairPhone, whatever.

mjburgess 5y ago
airplanes exist, and theyre owned by a baron too
ClumsyPilot 5y ago
"So buy another device, a feature phone, give money to Jolla, FairPhone, whatever." You are peddling a fantasy - my bank has mobile only access, and the app wont work on any alternative you lifted. The UK goverment app to apply for riggt to resde for European immigrants won't work either. What the fuck am i meant to do with those phones?
- pjmlp 5y ago
  Switch bank if that is so important to you. I only use banks that provide access via ATM and Web, in addition to apps.
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    Should I also switch countries? I cant uproot my entire life just to spite google
    - pjmlp 5y ago
      You don't need to switch country to spite Google, only be more clever with your options and vote with your wallets. I still carry my Windows Phone around.