4 ms·

The big difference is that I can choose not to pay a company I don't like, and that's fine. Governments will happily make my life crap if I don't pay taxes. I

The big difference is that I can choose not to pay a company I don't like, and that's fine. Governments will happily make my life crap if I don't pay taxes. I dislike greed as much as the next person, but the monopolized incarceration powers of governments are not to be forgotten. For some services, collective funding makes sense, like having hospitals that can stop the spread of diseases, or forcing pooling of money to locally maintain an even standard of infrastructure.

makeitdouble 3y ago
> The big difference is that I can choose not to pay a company I don't like, and that's fine. Which phone company do you positively like ? Which internet operator are you paying because you want them to thrive ? How do you feel about Qualcomm and feeding them money ?
- JKCalhoun 3y ago
  Which for-profit prison company are you willing to pay for? Which private military contractors do you want your tax dollars going to? (Comment is meant to be added on to yours, not contradict you.)
- seanp2k2 3y ago
  And which power company? PG&E has made it almost not worth it to harness the free power of the sun on my roof with their NEM 3.0 rules, that they passed just before holiday break after delaying for so long and against mass public outrage. They also snuck in a rename to “net billing tariff” (NBT), also called “solar billing plan” in some contexts. https://aurorasolar.com/blog/cpuc-voted-californias-net-billing-tariff-nem3-is-now-final/ https://aurorasolar.com/blog/cpuc-voted-californias-net-bill... Has a decent overview of the changes for the curious.
- tommiegannert 3y ago
  > Which phone company do you positively like ? Digitech Mobile is great so far. I think that particular question is very regional. In Switzerland (and Sweden,) the competition between them works well, IMHO. > Which internet operator are you paying because you want them to thrive ? I don't have a choice where I live. I.e. it's as bad as a monopoly. It used to be good, but then UPC was bought by Sunrise, and they seem intent on making me leave ASAP. > How do you feel about Qualcomm and feeding them money ? Blissfully ignorant.
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  well you got 3 choices in each of those industries. Leaving a country is much harder than leaving a crappy cable company.
  - makeitdouble 3y ago
    How many choices you have will change a lot depending on your country, but I think there are many constants. Mobile and internet providers tend to collude and align their offering to the other competitors. There must be exceptions, but I can't think of any. On the other side telecom companies getting sued for collusion feels like part of life. On Qualcomm, as far as I know any mobile phone sold in the west will have a networking chipset from Qualcomm or pay royalties/patents to Qualcomm for using their technology. Apple was trying to do something about it with their switch to Intel chips, but it didn't end well for them (I think they absorbed the Intel cell modem division and might be trying for a second time at some point in the future ?)
  - makeitdouble 3y ago
    > Leaving a country is much harder than leaving a crappy cable company That's an interesting take. Sometimes it's roughly the same, in particular when the cable company has a def acto monopoly in the country (the smaller your country is, the worse it probably gets). I've talked to a few people who see it as an indicator of the place's quality of life: do they have enough consumer protection to either force the monopoly to provide decent service or not have a monopoly in the first place ? how expensive is it ? (basic lifeline services at crazy price will usually go with other primary goods and services also priced crazily) Basically, a juridiction that can't do anything about their internet won't be able to do much about a lot of other issues directly impacting their population and economy. Sometimes you just need to leave your state, sometimes your country, but either way getting away from that specific juridiction is often the better choice.
KennyBlanken 3y ago
[flagged]
rcme 3y ago
It’s ironic that you’re complaining that you can’t avoid paying the government when the only reason you can pay for anything at all is because the government uses its monopoly on violence to protect your property rights. Paying the government is the price of participating in commerce at all.
- tommiegannert 3y ago
  I don't see the irony. I said that for some services, collective funding (i.e. taxes) makes sense, but not for all. OP didn't see the difference between governments and the enterprises they provide the framework for. I explained one big difference, and why I don't think collectivizing everything is a good idea.
- dools 3y ago
  And is the monopoly issuer of currency used to make those payments
failuser 3y ago
This is a good argument to vigorously enforce the antitrust laws, right?
mschuster91 3y ago
> The big difference is that I can choose not to pay a company I don't like, and that's fine. Were capitalism regulated, I'd agree with you - however the reality is that capitalism these days has devolved into monopoly and rent seeking: Unhappy with your phone and especially internet provider? Good luck finding a new one, in most cases there is no competition at all or it's just as bad. Unhappy with your social network, say because there are too many Nazis and conspiracy theorists running rampant? Bad luck, no federation requirement means you'll lose all your followers and they'll lose you. Unhappy with your bank? Competition is just as fucked up. Unhappy with your railroad transport provider? Tough luck, they own the rails so you can't get another company to ship your stuff. Unhappy with your phone or PC operating system? Good luck, in the best case you just have to buy all your applications again (if they are even available at the competitor), in the worst you'll have to live with frankly sub-par open source alternatives. Your email provider banned you because you sent a photo of your naked child to the pediatrician? Even an international media outrage won't help you get your account, your digital life back. The list goes on and on and on, and the common point is that anti-trust enforcement has gone completely down the drain.
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  >Unhappy with your social network, say because there are too many Nazis and conspiracy theorists running rampant? Bad luck, no federation requirement means you'll lose all your followers and they'll lose you. I don't know how a government would enforce this. Nor if we want them to. Yes, you will and arguably should lose your followers if you move sites, and that's because your followers are passive browsers who don't care about you specifically. None of us are Taylor Swift who will have millions follow wherever she decides to go. That's one offset of anonymity in this case. Also kind of funny that you mention federation as an implciit solution and then complain about email. > Unhappy with your phone or PC operating system? Good luck, in the best case you just have to buy all your applications again (if they are even available at the competitor), in the worst you'll have to live with frankly sub-par open source alternatives. Again, yes that makes sense. you acknoledging that they have better OS's seems to be submitting that there's value in their service. Personally, I can replicate 99% of what I use on Linux and a de-Googled AOSP, but it will vary from user to user (RIP to the artists stuck in the Adobe suite). Having a better service isn't grounds for a monopoly alone, that's just plain ol' competition.
xp84 3y ago
But thanks to the libertarian narrative you’re furthering, government is obliged to contract so many things to private companies, so now you get all the worst of both worlds (contractors charge high rates to government and waste lots of money, and government now compels us to pay the bill for companies we don’t like).

makeitdouble 3y ago

> The big difference is that I can choose not to pay a company I don't like, and that's fine. Which phone company do you positively like ? Which internet operator are you paying because you want them to thrive ? How do you feel about Qualcomm and feeding them money ?

JKCalhoun 3y ago
Which for-profit prison company are you willing to pay for? Which private military contractors do you want your tax dollars going to? (Comment is meant to be added on to yours, not contradict you.)
seanp2k2 3y ago
And which power company? PG&E has made it almost not worth it to harness the free power of the sun on my roof with their NEM 3.0 rules, that they passed just before holiday break after delaying for so long and against mass public outrage. They also snuck in a rename to “net billing tariff” (NBT), also called “solar billing plan” in some contexts. https://aurorasolar.com/blog/cpuc-voted-californias-net-billing-tariff-nem3-is-now-final/ https://aurorasolar.com/blog/cpuc-voted-californias-net-bill... Has a decent overview of the changes for the curious.
tommiegannert 3y ago
> Which phone company do you positively like ? Digitech Mobile is great so far. I think that particular question is very regional. In Switzerland (and Sweden,) the competition between them works well, IMHO. > Which internet operator are you paying because you want them to thrive ? I don't have a choice where I live. I.e. it's as bad as a monopoly. It used to be good, but then UPC was bought by Sunrise, and they seem intent on making me leave ASAP. > How do you feel about Qualcomm and feeding them money ? Blissfully ignorant.
johnnyanmac 3y ago
well you got 3 choices in each of those industries. Leaving a country is much harder than leaving a crappy cable company.
- makeitdouble 3y ago
  How many choices you have will change a lot depending on your country, but I think there are many constants. Mobile and internet providers tend to collude and align their offering to the other competitors. There must be exceptions, but I can't think of any. On the other side telecom companies getting sued for collusion feels like part of life. On Qualcomm, as far as I know any mobile phone sold in the west will have a networking chipset from Qualcomm or pay royalties/patents to Qualcomm for using their technology. Apple was trying to do something about it with their switch to Intel chips, but it didn't end well for them (I think they absorbed the Intel cell modem division and might be trying for a second time at some point in the future ?)
- makeitdouble 3y ago
  > Leaving a country is much harder than leaving a crappy cable company That's an interesting take. Sometimes it's roughly the same, in particular when the cable company has a def acto monopoly in the country (the smaller your country is, the worse it probably gets). I've talked to a few people who see it as an indicator of the place's quality of life: do they have enough consumer protection to either force the monopoly to provide decent service or not have a monopoly in the first place ? how expensive is it ? (basic lifeline services at crazy price will usually go with other primary goods and services also priced crazily) Basically, a juridiction that can't do anything about their internet won't be able to do much about a lot of other issues directly impacting their population and economy. Sometimes you just need to leave your state, sometimes your country, but either way getting away from that specific juridiction is often the better choice.

KennyBlanken 3y ago

[flagged]

rcme 3y ago

It’s ironic that you’re complaining that you can’t avoid paying the government when the only reason you can pay for anything at all is because the government uses its monopoly on violence to protect your property rights. Paying the government is the price of participating in commerce at all.

tommiegannert 3y ago
I don't see the irony. I said that for some services, collective funding (i.e. taxes) makes sense, but not for all. OP didn't see the difference between governments and the enterprises they provide the framework for. I explained one big difference, and why I don't think collectivizing everything is a good idea.
dools 3y ago
And is the monopoly issuer of currency used to make those payments

failuser 3y ago

This is a good argument to vigorously enforce the antitrust laws, right?

mschuster91 3y ago

> The big difference is that I can choose not to pay a company I don't like, and that's fine. Were capitalism regulated, I'd agree with you - however the reality is that capitalism these days has devolved into monopoly and rent seeking: Unhappy with your phone and especially internet provider? Good luck finding a new one, in most cases there is no competition at all or it's just as bad. Unhappy with your social network, say because there are too many Nazis and conspiracy theorists running rampant? Bad luck, no federation requirement means you'll lose all your followers and they'll lose you. Unhappy with your bank? Competition is just as fucked up. Unhappy with your railroad transport provider? Tough luck, they own the rails so you can't get another company to ship your stuff. Unhappy with your phone or PC operating system? Good luck, in the best case you just have to buy all your applications again (if they are even available at the competitor), in the worst you'll have to live with frankly sub-par open source alternatives. Your email provider banned you because you sent a photo of your naked child to the pediatrician? Even an international media outrage won't help you get your account, your digital life back. The list goes on and on and on, and the common point is that anti-trust enforcement has gone completely down the drain.

johnnyanmac 3y ago
>Unhappy with your social network, say because there are too many Nazis and conspiracy theorists running rampant? Bad luck, no federation requirement means you'll lose all your followers and they'll lose you. I don't know how a government would enforce this. Nor if we want them to. Yes, you will and arguably should lose your followers if you move sites, and that's because your followers are passive browsers who don't care about you specifically. None of us are Taylor Swift who will have millions follow wherever she decides to go. That's one offset of anonymity in this case. Also kind of funny that you mention federation as an implciit solution and then complain about email. > Unhappy with your phone or PC operating system? Good luck, in the best case you just have to buy all your applications again (if they are even available at the competitor), in the worst you'll have to live with frankly sub-par open source alternatives. Again, yes that makes sense. you acknoledging that they have better OS's seems to be submitting that there's value in their service. Personally, I can replicate 99% of what I use on Linux and a de-Googled AOSP, but it will vary from user to user (RIP to the artists stuck in the Adobe suite). Having a better service isn't grounds for a monopoly alone, that's just plain ol' competition.

xp84 3y ago

But thanks to the libertarian narrative you’re furthering, government is obliged to contract so many things to private companies, so now you get all the worst of both worlds (contractors charge high rates to government and waste lots of money, and government now compels us to pay the bill for companies we don’t like).