2 ms·
There is a question, but the part about the monopoly was in the setup, not the part being inquired about. It asked "how can the app store promote competition wh
by gnicholas 4y ago
There is a question, but the part about the monopoly was in the setup, not the part being inquired about. It asked "how can the app store promote competition when it is a monopoly on iOS?"
The second part of the question is assumed. To question that part, one would ask "how can the app store promote competition if it is a monopoly on iOS?"
- nomel 4y agoMaybe it's my locale (California, USA), but where I'm from, "What you're doing is assuming" is a very condescending response to someone asking a genuine question, and can only be found on the internet. But, perhaps my locale is why I perceive this as odd, rather than it being odd.
- gnicholas 4y agoI'm a CA native myself, and I don't talk the same way I write. In person, I probably would have said something like "but you're assuming away the key legal test, which is 'what is the "relevant market?"'". I tend to not go back and edit my comments for style, just for clarity. Could it be more polite? I guess, but it also seems pretty consistent with the logical/syllogistic style that is common on HN. I thought the question was not entirely in good faith, since it would be pretty obvious that there's no such thing as "monopoly on X" — otherwise it would make Sony a monopolist on Playstation, Microsoft a monopolist on XBox, etc.