6 ms·

Every world leading company won it's position though unfair advantage. Those are normally breaking laws, fraud, stealing technology or slave labour. None of th

Every world leading company won it's position though unfair advantage. Those are normally breaking laws, fraud, stealing technology or slave labour. None of them are there on merit.

ericd 5y ago
Which of those got Google to where they are? Apple?
- cheschire 5y ago
  I'm pretty sure there are multiples of movies made about Apple's journey that you may be interested in. As for Google, do you recall from the last 20 years any of the complaints about SEO fairness, AMP drama, Chrome monopoly, etc? This feels like a bait question because the answers are so obvious.
  - ericd 5y ago
    I don't think any of those obviously match any of the categories that the parent comment mentioned. It's even less clear that any of them were central to the success.
    - dtech 5y ago
      indeed, all of these issues were problems only because they were already dominant
    - rStar 5y ago
      well, you are outing yourself as one who doesn’t recognize reality. now, if you are getting a paycheck from google, fine, feed yourself and your family. otherwise you’re a shill dude. live it, love it, waste the only life you have. your choice good for you. like heroin, but more profitable and not as fun.
  - DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
    All of the controversial stories about Google were long after Google took-over as the best (yes, actual best) search-engine.
    - JanSt 5y ago
      Alphabet is an ad company that depends on collecting vast amounts of data. Search alone does not make money.
      - Jensson 5y ago
        What do you mean? Search generates more money than the rest of Google together. Through ads, yes, but Google search could run ads even without the rest of Google. Nothing else Google does generates nearly as much ROI as search, just that they can't invest more into search since they already got the entire market there so they do other things like putting countless hours into optimizing those search ads.
    - rStar 5y ago
      google search is so personalized now, you only get best in class search if you log out first.
  - nova22033 5y ago
    Chrome monopoly How is Chrome a monopoly? Google made a good browser and customers chose it over other alternatives. Now you can argue that chrome isn't a god browser. But that's your opinion. People are voting with their feet. Does google have an obligation to make their browser suck?
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - saagarjha 5y ago
      Did they? Or was it because Google asked everyone who used Google search to install their browser for several years?
    - AshamedCaptain 5y ago
      google took someone else's browser, put their logo on it and started advertising the shit out of it.
- rStar 5y ago
  all and all. other things too, but companies naturally want to downplay the impact of those 4 factors
- JanSt 5y ago
  (illegal) data collection (in many jurisdications) that is now impossible to replicate is a major competetive advantage
  - ericd 5y ago
    I think it was declared legal time and time again? I'm familiar with at least a couple image-related lawsuits where they came out on top. The bigger issue is that website owners have become increasingly hostile to crawling, and that's effectively closed the door behind Google, because that's when it starts getting more legally contentious. Which is why I think they should be forced to open up their crawl to everyone, so that we can have meaningful competition in the indexing/search space.
gruez 5y ago
TSMC is the world leader in semiconductors. Were they "breaking laws, fraud, stealing technology or slave labour"? Visa/Mastercard are the world leaders in payment processing. Were they "breaking laws, fraud, stealing technology or slave labour"?
- ggoo 5y ago
  “Unfair advantage” doesn’t have to be exactly one of those 4 items.
- ryoshu 5y ago
  Visa has been breaking laws: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_Inc.#Litigation_and_regulatory_actions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_Inc.#Litigation_and_regul...
- julienfr112 5y ago
  they hired Taiwanese talents from silicon valley that left with IP, no ?
- mdorazio 5y ago
  I’m simplifying things greatly here, but TSMC was founded by a man who took his US semiconductor experience to Taiwan and got his initial fab partially bankrolled by the Taiwanese government to get it off the ground. Personally, I’d say that counts as unfair advantage.
  - nova22033 5y ago
    his US semiconductor experience to Taiwan He took knowledge he gained as part of his employment to Taiwan. Was there any allegation of IP theft or are you saying everything you learn when working for an employer stays with the employer..that you can never use that knowledge at your next job. Figured out how to build a CI/CD pipeline for BIGCO1? Can't use that knowledge at BIGCO2..
    - mdorazio 5y ago
      I did not say that at all and I'm disappointed you would jump straight into a straw man argument. The parent comment and mine are about unfair advantage, not about IP theft. If you take your years of industry insider experience and start a company that directly competes with your previous employer, under the patronage of an entity that other people don't have access to, you have an unfair advantage in comparison to your would-be startup competitors. And that's the whole point of this particular comment thread - many successful companies had some kind of unfair advantage they were able to leverage to gain market position. Also, as a side note, knowing how to build basic software tools is not even remotely comparable to having the extremely specialized knowledge required to build a microchip fab.
globalise83 5y ago
There are many winner-take-all markets where dominance by a single firm makes complete economic sense ('natural monopolies'). In such a scenario it doesn't really matter which firm takes the lead: one of them will end up on top and it doesn't have to be through foul means - the self-reinforcing dynamics of the market are enough.
- hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
  This is the point that has definitely become super apparent to me in the last decade or so. It's not that companies have to be evil or fraudulent, but usually the companies that "win" end up being the most aggressive, and then there are just a ton of positive feedback loops that make the company with the slight lead even stronger. All people (potential employees, potential execs, VC firms) want to go with the winner, so as soon as one firm starts to pull away from the pack it becomes much easier for the firm to attract the best talent and funding.
fulafel 5y ago
And convincing countries to give you monopoly on various things, and to wielding power over countries to make them pressure other countries to do the same.

Every world leading company won it's position though unfair advantage. Those are normally breaking laws, fraud, stealing technology or slave labour. None of them are there on merit.

ericd 5y ago

Which of those got Google to where they are? Apple?

cheschire 5y ago
I'm pretty sure there are multiples of movies made about Apple's journey that you may be interested in. As for Google, do you recall from the last 20 years any of the complaints about SEO fairness, AMP drama, Chrome monopoly, etc? This feels like a bait question because the answers are so obvious.
- ericd 5y ago
  I don't think any of those obviously match any of the categories that the parent comment mentioned. It's even less clear that any of them were central to the success.
  - dtech 5y ago
    indeed, all of these issues were problems only because they were already dominant
  - rStar 5y ago
    well, you are outing yourself as one who doesn’t recognize reality. now, if you are getting a paycheck from google, fine, feed yourself and your family. otherwise you’re a shill dude. live it, love it, waste the only life you have. your choice good for you. like heroin, but more profitable and not as fun.
- DaiPlusPlus 5y ago
  All of the controversial stories about Google were long after Google took-over as the best (yes, actual best) search-engine.
  - JanSt 5y ago
    Alphabet is an ad company that depends on collecting vast amounts of data. Search alone does not make money.
    - Jensson 5y ago
      What do you mean? Search generates more money than the rest of Google together. Through ads, yes, but Google search could run ads even without the rest of Google. Nothing else Google does generates nearly as much ROI as search, just that they can't invest more into search since they already got the entire market there so they do other things like putting countless hours into optimizing those search ads.
  - rStar 5y ago
    google search is so personalized now, you only get best in class search if you log out first.
- nova22033 5y ago
  Chrome monopoly How is Chrome a monopoly? Google made a good browser and customers chose it over other alternatives. Now you can argue that chrome isn't a god browser. But that's your opinion. People are voting with their feet. Does google have an obligation to make their browser suck?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - saagarjha 5y ago
    Did they? Or was it because Google asked everyone who used Google search to install their browser for several years?
  - AshamedCaptain 5y ago
    google took someone else's browser, put their logo on it and started advertising the shit out of it.
rStar 5y ago
all and all. other things too, but companies naturally want to downplay the impact of those 4 factors
JanSt 5y ago
(illegal) data collection (in many jurisdications) that is now impossible to replicate is a major competetive advantage
- ericd 5y ago
  I think it was declared legal time and time again? I'm familiar with at least a couple image-related lawsuits where they came out on top. The bigger issue is that website owners have become increasingly hostile to crawling, and that's effectively closed the door behind Google, because that's when it starts getting more legally contentious. Which is why I think they should be forced to open up their crawl to everyone, so that we can have meaningful competition in the indexing/search space.

gruez 5y ago

TSMC is the world leader in semiconductors. Were they "breaking laws, fraud, stealing technology or slave labour"? Visa/Mastercard are the world leaders in payment processing. Were they "breaking laws, fraud, stealing technology or slave labour"?

ggoo 5y ago
“Unfair advantage” doesn’t have to be exactly one of those 4 items.
ryoshu 5y ago
Visa has been breaking laws: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_Inc.#Litigation_and_regulatory_actions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_Inc.#Litigation_and_regul...
julienfr112 5y ago
they hired Taiwanese talents from silicon valley that left with IP, no ?
mdorazio 5y ago
I’m simplifying things greatly here, but TSMC was founded by a man who took his US semiconductor experience to Taiwan and got his initial fab partially bankrolled by the Taiwanese government to get it off the ground. Personally, I’d say that counts as unfair advantage.
- nova22033 5y ago
  his US semiconductor experience to Taiwan He took knowledge he gained as part of his employment to Taiwan. Was there any allegation of IP theft or are you saying everything you learn when working for an employer stays with the employer..that you can never use that knowledge at your next job. Figured out how to build a CI/CD pipeline for BIGCO1? Can't use that knowledge at BIGCO2..
  - mdorazio 5y ago
    I did not say that at all and I'm disappointed you would jump straight into a straw man argument. The parent comment and mine are about unfair advantage, not about IP theft. If you take your years of industry insider experience and start a company that directly competes with your previous employer, under the patronage of an entity that other people don't have access to, you have an unfair advantage in comparison to your would-be startup competitors. And that's the whole point of this particular comment thread - many successful companies had some kind of unfair advantage they were able to leverage to gain market position. Also, as a side note, knowing how to build basic software tools is not even remotely comparable to having the extremely specialized knowledge required to build a microchip fab.

globalise83 5y ago

There are many winner-take-all markets where dominance by a single firm makes complete economic sense ('natural monopolies'). In such a scenario it doesn't really matter which firm takes the lead: one of them will end up on top and it doesn't have to be through foul means - the self-reinforcing dynamics of the market are enough.

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
This is the point that has definitely become super apparent to me in the last decade or so. It's not that companies have to be evil or fraudulent, but usually the companies that "win" end up being the most aggressive, and then there are just a ton of positive feedback loops that make the company with the slight lead even stronger. All people (potential employees, potential execs, VC firms) want to go with the winner, so as soon as one firm starts to pull away from the pack it becomes much easier for the firm to attract the best talent and funding.

fulafel 5y ago

And convincing countries to give you monopoly on various things, and to wielding power over countries to make them pressure other countries to do the same.