4 ms·

You're making meaningless distinctions. Fundamentally, I don't see a difference between Apple writing some words and suddenly, you have to pay a fee for distri

You're making meaningless distinctions. Fundamentally, I don't see a difference between Apple writing some words and suddenly, you have to pay a fee for distribution of iPhone apps on non-Apple app stores, and say, a government writing some words and suddenly, foreign imports have to pay extra taxes. Neither is generating value; they're both rent-seeking in those examples. They both have power because of what's "theirs". Alternately, you could say neither has any power, and both provide value. The government provides value by funding public infrastructure, promoting economic development, protecting citizens from foreign invasion, and so on. If citizens don't like it, they can vote the government out (though it would be different if it were a dictatorship). In my original comment, I was basically irritated by you implying Apple has no "power," and that they can only counter the government's power through "value," i.e., making people's lives better somehow. It's insinuating Apple derives no power from their business, and that Apple provides value for no reason (hence the use of the word "altruism").

robertlagrant 3y ago
> Alternately, you could say neither has any power, and both provide value. The government provides value by funding public infrastructure, promoting economic development, protecting citizens from foreign invasion, and so on. If citizens don't like it, they can vote the government out (though it would be different if it were a dictatorship). This is the problem, though. If Apple starts doing a bad job, they will lose all their sales. So they have to constantly re-earn customers, and keep making it worthwhile for developers to build for their platform. Their product is a bit sticky, but not very. The EU - well, the EU doesn't do some of the stuff you list, but even if it did, you can't vote it out. You might be able to vote for your local EU representative, but that's about it, and it's an incredibly weak signal. More simply: Apple provides value, which people will chase. If value stops, Apple will fail. So it needs to keep providing value for people to keep opting in. The EU's regulatory influence ultimately derives from the threat of sanctions and imprisonment. That's power, because you can't opt out.
- trealira 3y ago
  If the EU does a bad job, or is particularly bad for one country, those citizens can vote to leave the EU. Several parties in EU member countries advocate for this [0], but those parties aren't popular, and so far, only the UK has withdrawn. If the EU stops being a good place to do business, then international corporations like Apple will stop doing business there, and/or dissatisfied members will withdraw from the EU. The economic growth of EU nations will decline, their citizens' quality of life will decline, and they'll lose influence in international politics. The same applies to individual national governments; it's just that national governments in the EU are betting on the EU's success, not its decline. > More simply: Apple provides value, which people will chase. If value stops, Apple will fail. So it needs to keep providing value for people to keep opting in. The EU's regulatory influence ultimately derives from the threat of sanctions and imprisonment. That's power, because you can't opt out. Apple can opt out by not doing business in the EU. The EU provides value by creating a unified economic zone between European member states. You can't do business without enforcing copyright, property rights, and enforcing the law through a state monopoly on violence. All governments provide value for corporations by supporting them like this; corporations exist because the state, and the people represented by the state, want them to exist, because they're already an artificial construct that the state uses violence and imprisonment to support (and to be clear, I'm not against corporations existing; I'm not a communist). The fact that they have the ability to use their economic influence to prevent competition from arising is only there because they rely on state power to exist. State violence and Apple's degree of control over the market are inseparable. So it makes complete sense for a state to regulate the actions of a corporation to benefit their people; international corporations do business in other countries because it's mutually beneficial for the corporation and the people of that country. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European_Union#Advocates_in_other_countries_for_withdrawal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European_U...
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    > If the EU does a bad job, or is particularly bad for one country, those citizens can vote to leave the EU. This is an insanely weak and laggy signal. As soon as iPhones drop slightly in quality, some people will start switching, and more will follow. That is a much better signal. And that's why Apple need to constantly re-win their customers' business, and keep doing a good job. That is a precise and rapid signal. > The EU provides value by creating a unified economic zone between European member states. This isn't quite right. The EU also threatens value prevention by holding hostage all of the EU's citizens as potential customers. I would argue that's far more of a threat of value reduction than the small value add of having a unified economic zone. Apple sells just fine all over the world. The threat isn't "pay us fines or you'll have to deal with our member states individually". It's "pay us fines or you can't sell in the EU."

robertlagrant 3y ago

> Alternately, you could say neither has any power, and both provide value. The government provides value by funding public infrastructure, promoting economic development, protecting citizens from foreign invasion, and so on. If citizens don't like it, they can vote the government out (though it would be different if it were a dictatorship). This is the problem, though. If Apple starts doing a bad job, they will lose all their sales. So they have to constantly re-earn customers, and keep making it worthwhile for developers to build for their platform. Their product is a bit sticky, but not very. The EU - well, the EU doesn't do some of the stuff you list, but even if it did, you can't vote it out. You might be able to vote for your local EU representative, but that's about it, and it's an incredibly weak signal. More simply: Apple provides value, which people will chase. If value stops, Apple will fail. So it needs to keep providing value for people to keep opting in. The EU's regulatory influence ultimately derives from the threat of sanctions and imprisonment. That's power, because you can't opt out.

trealira 3y ago
If the EU does a bad job, or is particularly bad for one country, those citizens can vote to leave the EU. Several parties in EU member countries advocate for this [0], but those parties aren't popular, and so far, only the UK has withdrawn. If the EU stops being a good place to do business, then international corporations like Apple will stop doing business there, and/or dissatisfied members will withdraw from the EU. The economic growth of EU nations will decline, their citizens' quality of life will decline, and they'll lose influence in international politics. The same applies to individual national governments; it's just that national governments in the EU are betting on the EU's success, not its decline. > More simply: Apple provides value, which people will chase. If value stops, Apple will fail. So it needs to keep providing value for people to keep opting in. The EU's regulatory influence ultimately derives from the threat of sanctions and imprisonment. That's power, because you can't opt out. Apple can opt out by not doing business in the EU. The EU provides value by creating a unified economic zone between European member states. You can't do business without enforcing copyright, property rights, and enforcing the law through a state monopoly on violence. All governments provide value for corporations by supporting them like this; corporations exist because the state, and the people represented by the state, want them to exist, because they're already an artificial construct that the state uses violence and imprisonment to support (and to be clear, I'm not against corporations existing; I'm not a communist). The fact that they have the ability to use their economic influence to prevent competition from arising is only there because they rely on state power to exist. State violence and Apple's degree of control over the market are inseparable. So it makes complete sense for a state to regulate the actions of a corporation to benefit their people; international corporations do business in other countries because it's mutually beneficial for the corporation and the people of that country. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European_Union#Advocates_in_other_countries_for_withdrawal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_from_the_European_U...
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  > If the EU does a bad job, or is particularly bad for one country, those citizens can vote to leave the EU. This is an insanely weak and laggy signal. As soon as iPhones drop slightly in quality, some people will start switching, and more will follow. That is a much better signal. And that's why Apple need to constantly re-win their customers' business, and keep doing a good job. That is a precise and rapid signal. > The EU provides value by creating a unified economic zone between European member states. This isn't quite right. The EU also threatens value prevention by holding hostage all of the EU's citizens as potential customers. I would argue that's far more of a threat of value reduction than the small value add of having a unified economic zone. Apple sells just fine all over the world. The threat isn't "pay us fines or you'll have to deal with our member states individually". It's "pay us fines or you can't sell in the EU."