14 ms·

What amazes and perplexes me is that Apple thinks it can effectively play politics against the EU and that somehow their customers will back them in the face of

What amazes and perplexes me is that Apple thinks it can effectively play politics against the EU and that somehow their customers will back them in the face of the "consequences" Apple applies, which are pretty transparent and really quite amateurish (eg no more web apps for you!). As the article states, the first mistake Apple makes is thinking the EU is somehow like the US, but I can't see how any large proportion of Apple's customers will back Apple's actions against their own government. EU citizens haven't been brainwashed into thinking that their government is their enemy, at least not to the same extent as the US.

Ekaros 3y ago
And even if they are thinking that government is their enemy. That doesn't mean companies like Apple are their friends or allies either...
pokepim 3y ago
[dead]
mjburgess 3y ago
It does seem they've mistaken the general sentiment towards government regulation in europe, which is typically, "more, better". Since we have so many consumer protections, much of how we end up engaging with the law around business practices is to our benefit. We're always aware we can raise bad business practices with an ombudsman (etc.). So our lived experience of government regulation is, in large part, positive. The fringe american "all regulation is bad" is hyped up for certain media causes, but very alien to most in practice. It's essentially unimaginable to the ordinary european that large corporations would have a better social conscience than government.
- pydry 3y ago
  >It does seem they've mistaken the general sentiment towards government regulation in europe, which is typically, "more, better". The notion of regulation as being on a sliding scale where "more is worse" was a manufactured American meme created by the Kochs in the 1980s. It emerged from some of their epic fights with the environmental protection agency and their subsequent lobbying and public relations outreach efforts that followed. They set up and funded number of institutions dedicated to telling this story (and others, including that one about hairdresser licensing). The Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, and the Cato Institute to name a few. If you think about it for a few seconds, dumbing down a complex system like laws or regulation to "more vs less" is quite stupid. It's like saying that some programmers believe in "more lines of code" and some believe in "fewer". Do you want more laws or fewer laws? The question doesn't make sense. You want the right kind of laws, right? Ones that are as simple as possible and no simpler. The same for code. I think it's important to put this type of thing in a historical context though. These ideas and stories don't emerge out of nowhere - there is usually money behind them. In this case, it was money from an oil and chemicals company that had a singular goal - to fight the EPA - so it could destroy the natural environment in America with absolute impunity.
  - alipang 3y ago
    The idea that anyone who's opposed to narrow government regulations is somehow brainwashed by the Kochs is just an unsufferably smug attitude towards people you disagree with. It's like the "funded by George Soros therefore bad" you sometimes see on the right. I'm sure they've spent money on promoting this, but there's many reasons you'd come to this conclusion other than having it "manufactured" for you by billionaire conspiracies. You have to start by considering that your political opponents are capable of thinking for themselves if you want to ever do more than just preach to the choir. Declaring them idiots in the guise of "providing historical context" isn't helpful.
    - bombcar 3y ago
      It is worthwhile contemplating who is benefiting from “my opponents are brain dead retards”.
    - silverquiet 3y ago
      > Even on death’s doorstep, Trevor was not angry. In fact, he staunchly supported the stance promoted by his elected officials. “Ain’t no way I would ever support Obamacare or sign up for it,” he told me. “I would rather die.” When I asked him why he felt this way even as he faced severe illness, he explained: “We don’t need any more government in our lives. And in any case, no way I want my tax dollars paying for Mexicans or welfare queens.” https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/jonathan-m-metzl-dying-whiteness/ https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/jonathan-m-metzl-dying...
      - kbolino 3y ago
        There is nothing more smug than the point-and-laugh hit piece, where a journalist finds some ignorant rube for the college-educated to sneer at.
        silverquiet 3y ago
        The author is not a journalist, but a doctor who studied public health issues.
- paulsutter 3y ago
  Yes each time we see these cookie warnings, we admire a system that does so much to our benefit
  - FranzFerdiNaN 3y ago
    Just install some browser extension that automatically refuses them.
    - fmajid 3y ago
      The next step for the EU is Global Privacy Control, which is basically the old Do-Not_track header, but legally enforceable this time (the EU is not alone in this, it's already the law in California). If your browser sends that header, the website will have to not show you a cookie popup and treat it as a "Reject All" instead.
  - troupo 3y ago
    Nothing in the law requires those cookie banners. If you don't agree, you can quote to me the exact passage in the GDPR where it talks about cookies, banners, or browsers. Or you can read what Github has to say about this: https://github.blog/2020-12-17-no-cookie-for-you/ https://github.blog/2020-12-17-no-cookie-for-you/
    - bengale 3y ago
      This is the exact problem though, noone really cares what the law says, they care that now they have annoying cookie banners. They don't blame the businesses for this; they blame the EU. The more of this they layer on the more ordinary people get irritated by the EU. This is how Brexit happened, remain tried to explain this stuff over and over again and no one wants to hear it. They want the cookie banners gone, or the bendy banana rules gone. The EU makes itself an easy target everytime they add more. If nothing else was learned from Brexit that should have been the thing. There actually isn't a point where you can spend enough money to convince people of this stuff when they don't want to hear it.
- bengale 3y ago
  > the general sentiment towards government regulation in europe, which is typically, "more, better". I'd need to be convinced that's true. More regulation was a huge part of the successful campaign to get the UK out of the EU. It seems to get effusive praise in places like this, but in daily business, I generally hear the term GDPR spat. Is anyone expecting the incoming car regulation around beeps and bongs every time you approach the speed limit to be received well by ordinary people? The USBC stuff that this article heaps praise on is a great example, techies love it, everyone else in everyday life I've only heard complain about it. Maybe it improves things long-term, but I can't remember hearing anyone say "more, better" about any of these things. I would say the overall sentiment I've heard is that there is a general suspicion that the reason European business lags so far behind the US is that we're held back. I don't think the handful of people that will be able to play Fortnite on their iPhones will change this. It certainly wont if they end up needing multiple app stores for their daily apps.
  - xyzzy_plugh 3y ago
    > the successful campaign to get the UK out of the EU. Depending on your definition of success of course.
    - Ragnarork 3y ago
      Ah but the campaign was successful. The actual pullout and its consequences, on the other hand...
      - arethuza 3y ago
        Even the Daily Telegraph is having second thoughts about Brexit: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/02/28/uk-eu-are-being-pushed-back-together/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/02/28/uk-eu-are-be...
  - mjburgess 3y ago
    note that since leaving the EU, UK regulators have been widely seen (by business and finance) to take a more risk-averse attitude on the EU across all new comptences brought in (eg, food standards, chemical standards, etc.). The 52% who voted to leave were not voting for a massive deregulated society. In most cases, actually the opposite: "bring back control"
- immibis 3y ago
  Nowhere is the general sentiment towards government regulation "more, better". The correct sentiment is both "more good ones, better" and "less bad ones, better"
  - shrimp_emoji 3y ago
    But there is the general sentiment "less, better". And that's because it's right. That "good ones" is both subjective and a challenge tantamount to "write bug-free code". People aren't worthy of that kind of trust.
    - immibis 3y ago
      This comment explains it well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39609172 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39609172 To summarize: Laws are like lines of code. Nobody in their right mind would put programs on a spectrum between "more lines" and "fewer lines". Lines of code that help do the necessary work are good, and unnecessary lines of code are bad. And so it is with regulations.
  - hnben 3y ago
    "more, better" assumes that most regulations are perceived as good
- weebull 3y ago
  > So our lived experience of government regulation is, in large part, positive. I think I'd nuance it a bit. We see it as necessary. Necessary because otherwise powerful companies take advantage I think most can point to bad places in life for government regulations, but when the opposition is more powerful than most governments you need to fight with the most powerful thing you have.
drooopy 3y ago
Despite the rise of far right populist parties, Europe tends to lean more on the left side of the political spectrum compared to America, and corporate worship is a relatively new thing over here. People tend to have more faith in governments and treat companies with more distrust, compared to the US which seems to be the other way around.
- Lutger 3y ago
  For some definition of left. The interesting thing about the article is that all this EU regulatory control over corporations is in fact deeply capitalistic and the very reason for its existence, and in the corporations interest. Which is not what most EU citizens would consider being on the left of the political spectrum. The idea is: we need regulation to shape the market where businesses can compete freely to the advantage of both businesses and consumers. If we don't regulate, monopolistic corporation would threaten the single EU market. Or even more simplified: we need rules to have a free market. The US version (or one of the versions) of capitalism is more of a free-for-all, where the most important thing is to reduce regulation, not increase it. It seems to trust the judicial system more than the government.
  - mr_tombuben 3y ago
    The European definition of "freedom of speech" interestingly also differs compared to the American one in a very similar way.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - mpol 3y ago
    Now you are twisting words :) Capitalism is like a cancer, it will grow endlessly and will become feudalism. Socialism is the government applying rules to capitalism, so it doesn't get out of control. US policy of neo-liberalism is growing in Europe too, which is giving problems.
realusername 3y ago
Especially that they don't seem to get that while the EU is very slow to act, once it's moving it's almost unstoppable. The time for Apple to get their point across isn't now but a decade ago.
dgellow 3y ago
To add to this, Apple is seen as a foreign company trying to cheat with local regulators
throwaway473825 3y ago
>EU citizens haven't been brainwashed into thinking that their government is their enemy, at least not to the same extent as the US. The same phenomenon can be seen in other areas, such as digital cash: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Dpu6G_UlSdM https://youtube.com/watch?v=Dpu6G_UlSdM On paper, digital cash is superior to both physical cash and digital bank money in almost all aspects, but many Americans oppose it anyway because they see their government as their enemy.
- blitzar 3y ago
  Yet digital cash is seen by actual true patriots as the solution to free themselves from the enemy the government.
  - soco 3y ago
    As an European I fail to see how I could call myself patriot and at the same time distrust my own government - elected by me. Even if I didn't like the government, I'd still go with it because it's representing my country, and I'd also try to change the aspects which I don't like, again because it's my country. Those "actual true patriots" sound to me more like actual true selfish people which only want things happening according to their own ideas and needs.
    - blitzar 3y ago
      Stealing from above; > Distrust of government, and the limiting of its powers, is an American founding principle American Patriots believe defending themselves and their country from an oppressive government is true patriotism. It looks and sounds a lot like you think because taken to its logical conclusion thats exactly what it is.
    - maxwell 3y ago
      As a European, you almost certainly have better representation than most Americans. We haven't expanded the House of Representatives since 1929. We're approaching a million constituents per rep, an extreme outlier among OECD countries: https://www.amacad.org/ourcommonpurpose/enlarging-the-house/section/7 https://www.amacad.org/ourcommonpurpose/enlarging-the-house/... The reason Americans no longer trust Congress is because the Colonists had better representation per constituent (on paper) in British Parliament. Early U.S. representation was in line with Nordic countries today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_apportionment#Controversy_and_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_ap...
graemep 3y ago
I am not sure they are wrong. It will be interesting to exactly what the EU does regarding Apple's malicious compliance with regard to allowing third party apps stores. I hope the EU comes down hard.
wouldbecouldbe 3y ago
It's suprising that the US still holds itself as the champion of the free market where it's more a corporate Oligarchy. It's clear Apple is trying to be as monopolistic as possible, understable from their perspective, but it's the EU job to regulate it, just a shame of the US fell so deep.
- andsoitis 3y ago
  > It's suprising that the US still holds itself as the champion of the free market where it's more a corporate Oligarchy. The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal (both American), have been publishing the Index of Economic Freedom since 1995 and don't put the USA in 25th position: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom#Rankings_and_scores https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom#Rank... In some areas the US is clearly the leader in championing the free market, such as the US Freedom of Navitation Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_navigation#United_States_Freedom_of_Navigation_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_navigation#United_S...
  - jauntywundrkind 3y ago
    The Heritage Foundation & WSJ are both the tip of the spear, driving agenda to let big businesses do whatever they want. Even if America was clearly #1 in corporate freedom, they would never say so; their reason for existence is to commit America to letting big business be less regulated and you only can sell that by making our present stance look moderate or insufficient.
massysett 3y ago
“brainwashed” Distrust of government, and the limiting of its powers, is an American founding principle. It has resulted in federalism, separation of powers, a Constitution that protects property rights, and a Bill of Rights. This skepticism of government stemmed from the lived experience of the founders. That this founding principle still permeates American thinking and American life is something I would call culture, or an ethos. But it is not, in my experience, brainwashing.
- Sammi 3y ago
  "federalism, separation of powers, a Constitution that protects property rights, and a Bill of Rights." These things exist in the EU. Are you sure you are not brainwashed?
  - buzzert 3y ago
    The US Constitution maintains that rights defined in the Bill of Rights pre-exist government ("inalienable"). The EU's Charter of Fundamental Rights defines rights granted to the people by the government. This is a subtle, but important difference.
    - schoen 3y ago
      I agree that the U.S. political tradition often regards our rights as recognized or discovered rather than granted, but the "inalienable" language is from the Declaration of Independence, not the Bill of Rights (and in the original it was "unalienable", which is now archaic).
    - piva00 3y ago
      I still can't reconcile the fact that "Life" is one of those inalienable rights while the US still has capital punishment (and that part of the population even celebrates having it).
      - buzzert 3y ago
        Capital punishment is not in the constitution, and it is regularly challenged legally. Many states are continuing to abolish it.
llm_trw 3y ago
I think there needs to be a word like "Paris syndrome" for when Americans meet actual Europeans and find out their politics. I've not met anyone who doesn't work in Brussels who thinks the EU isn't a dysfunctional pile of shit. The most spirited defense I've heard of it is "Well at least it keeps the Germans from invading again.". > The EU, it's better than genocide, by a bit - probably. -- Enthusiastic EU supporter, 2024.
- bengale 3y ago
  Great term. Sometimes, I think I must live on a different continent. It comes down to interest I think, for someone with a bunch of devices and online all the time it sounds great when the EU forces USBC through for example. Even though they don't generally have a good view of how ordinary people interpret it either. But at the far end something like the damage the common agricultural policy has for ordinary europeans is completely lost on them. There would never be any interest in how it impacts people.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    > for someone with a bunch of devices and online all the time it sounds great when the EU forces USBC through for example Have you never met an Apple user that carried around both Lightning and USB-C cables? This sort of sentiment confounds me, everyone I knew that had seen a Macbook was waiting on a USB-C iPhone for years. The only people I saw defending Lightning were Apple devotees online. > There would never be any interest in how it impacts people. You're free to use the extra comment space to explain it to us.
    - bengale 3y ago
      > Have you never met an Apple user that carried around both Lightning and USB-C cables? Have you ever met someone that just has an iPhone? There are considerably more of them than those carrying ipads and MacBooks and switches and the like.
      - smoldesu 3y ago
mrighele 3y ago
> EU citizens haven't been brainwashed into thinking that their government is their enemy I don't think that EU is so homogeneous in this regard. Ask that question to people from Italy and Finland and you will get quite different answers, and rightly so, because Italian and Finnish government, and in general state are quite different.
- bojan 3y ago
  Ask that question even within Italy or Finland and you're probably going to get different answers. However, ask an Italian or a Finn about an attitude towards consumers rights, and you're likely to end up with a similar answer.
ETH_start 3y ago
>EU citizens haven't been brainwashed into thinking that their government is their enemy The government is the most powerful entity in society. If brainwashing is to happen, it's almost certain to be done by the state and its allies. The last 80 years is a history of growing government power and public agreement with the narrative that expansive government control is good: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/social-spending-oecd-longrun https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/social-spending-oecd-long...
apwell23 3y ago
anyone who deoesn't think like me must be brainwashed.
mk89 3y ago
Careful, there are some Apple fanboys defending Apple for their beautiful UX that does things only to simplify and make life better, not to monetize - that's just a small side effect. PS: I own several Apple devices, but I can still recognize mafia methods.
classified 3y ago
> ...thinking the EU is somehow like the US... I suspect US-ians in general have a hard time realizing that the US is not the only planet in the universe. It is part of the culture to assume that the US way of doing things is universal.
carlosjobim 3y ago
> EU citizens haven't been brainwashed into thinking that their government is their enemy, at least not to the same extent as the US. US citizens haven't been brainwashed into thinking that their government is their friend, at least not to the same extent as the EU. Honestly, if you talk to real people within the EU, you'll find that maybe half of them are mostly against the EU. Real life is not the same as HN, because most citizens are not part of the "elite" that benefits the most from EU programs and systems. Like all governments there are very good things about the EU and very bad things. And somebody has to pay for their maintenance. You should be concerned if your thought patterns are healthy if you dismiss everybody with a different opinion as yours as "brainwashed". It doesn't help you in the long run.
- bojan 3y ago
  > Honestly, if you talk to real people within the EU, you'll find that maybe half of them are mostly against the EU. The polling seems to be proving you wrong. Even in the UK the attitude towards the EU seems to be net positive.
  - carlosjobim 3y ago
    I wrote "if you talk to people", which is different from what a poll might say. Yes, it's anecdotal.
    - emptyfile 3y ago
      [dead]
    - piva00 3y ago
      I talk to people here in the EU, and most of my anecdotes support the EU, even the ones with reservations regarding it. So anecdotes don't matter in this discussion.
  - willmadden 3y ago
    That is because most polling is not a representative sample of peoples' beliefs and is untrustworthy. The "mainstream" polling and coverage of Brexit is a great example, or the polling and coverage around the 2016 US presidential election.
bambax 3y ago
Yes. Also, Apple's market share in Europe is much lower than in the US. Many if not most Europeans wouldn't care if Apple ceased to exist today (or ceased to be able to sell its products in Europe). I certainly wouldn't. We have lots of options.
dspillett 3y ago
> What amazes and perplexes me is that Apple thinks it can effectively play politics against the EU and that somehow their customers will back them in the face of the "consequences" Apple applies, Given the general attitude of many ardent Apple fans, I don't find this so surprising. Especially as while the feature is attractive it is not yet used by a large proportion of the customer base (partly because it is not yet widely used by apps, though it is steadily becoming more so). I think what tipped it over the balance, so what they judged wrong, is the fact the braking of existing features was only going to happen in Europe. This made it hard for even the most cultish follower of the brand to paint the “well, it isn't a good feature anyway” picture because if that was the case the drop would have been universal. Counter intuitively: maybe if they had made the change globally, making it less obviously the result of a childish hissy-fit, they would have had more support from the core customer base.
quitit 3y ago
>somehow their customers will back them in the face of the "consequences" Apple applies Could you elaborate on this point? I'm not sure what their customers would even be able to do in apple's favour? Discussions on tax and anticompetitive activity is largely niche, and even here the facts don't get in the way of the court of public opinion: Take each of these major tax/anticompetitive headline grabbers from the last few years: Apple Owes $14.5 Billion in Back Taxes to Ireland, E.U. Says - New York Times. Apple hit with record €1.1bn fine in France - BBC Italian antitrust watchdog fines Apple, Amazon more than $225m - Al Jazeera. And it's about there where most readers stop, but what actually happened after this point? 1. The latest ruling in the 14BN irish tax saga was in Apple's favour, and since then it's taken around 3 years for the EU to file their appeal. So that is still on-going with the EU on the back foot. 2. The record French 1.1Bn antitrust fine, reduced to a third, and the appeals process is still incomplete. 3. The 225M fine from the Italian antitrust authority was struck down entirely. These are judgements from the EU's own courts, which lends credibility to the people who make cynical statements about the various EU agencies application of these fines. For this reason I scoff when I read an editorial which describes the USA as protectionist in comparison to the EU. The evidence is to the contrary.
capr 3y ago
ah yes, the "everybody who doesn't agree with me must be brainwashed" cliche

Ekaros 3y ago

And even if they are thinking that government is their enemy. That doesn't mean companies like Apple are their friends or allies either...

pokepim 3y ago

[dead]

mjburgess 3y ago

It does seem they've mistaken the general sentiment towards government regulation in europe, which is typically, "more, better". Since we have so many consumer protections, much of how we end up engaging with the law around business practices is to our benefit. We're always aware we can raise bad business practices with an ombudsman (etc.). So our lived experience of government regulation is, in large part, positive. The fringe american "all regulation is bad" is hyped up for certain media causes, but very alien to most in practice. It's essentially unimaginable to the ordinary european that large corporations would have a better social conscience than government.

pydry 3y ago
>It does seem they've mistaken the general sentiment towards government regulation in europe, which is typically, "more, better". The notion of regulation as being on a sliding scale where "more is worse" was a manufactured American meme created by the Kochs in the 1980s. It emerged from some of their epic fights with the environmental protection agency and their subsequent lobbying and public relations outreach efforts that followed. They set up and funded number of institutions dedicated to telling this story (and others, including that one about hairdresser licensing). The Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, and the Cato Institute to name a few. If you think about it for a few seconds, dumbing down a complex system like laws or regulation to "more vs less" is quite stupid. It's like saying that some programmers believe in "more lines of code" and some believe in "fewer". Do you want more laws or fewer laws? The question doesn't make sense. You want the right kind of laws, right? Ones that are as simple as possible and no simpler. The same for code. I think it's important to put this type of thing in a historical context though. These ideas and stories don't emerge out of nowhere - there is usually money behind them. In this case, it was money from an oil and chemicals company that had a singular goal - to fight the EPA - so it could destroy the natural environment in America with absolute impunity.
- alipang 3y ago
  The idea that anyone who's opposed to narrow government regulations is somehow brainwashed by the Kochs is just an unsufferably smug attitude towards people you disagree with. It's like the "funded by George Soros therefore bad" you sometimes see on the right. I'm sure they've spent money on promoting this, but there's many reasons you'd come to this conclusion other than having it "manufactured" for you by billionaire conspiracies. You have to start by considering that your political opponents are capable of thinking for themselves if you want to ever do more than just preach to the choir. Declaring them idiots in the guise of "providing historical context" isn't helpful.
  - bombcar 3y ago
    It is worthwhile contemplating who is benefiting from “my opponents are brain dead retards”.
  - silverquiet 3y ago
    > Even on death’s doorstep, Trevor was not angry. In fact, he staunchly supported the stance promoted by his elected officials. “Ain’t no way I would ever support Obamacare or sign up for it,” he told me. “I would rather die.” When I asked him why he felt this way even as he faced severe illness, he explained: “We don’t need any more government in our lives. And in any case, no way I want my tax dollars paying for Mexicans or welfare queens.” https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/jonathan-m-metzl-dying-whiteness/ https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/jonathan-m-metzl-dying...
    - kbolino 3y ago
      There is nothing more smug than the point-and-laugh hit piece, where a journalist finds some ignorant rube for the college-educated to sneer at.
      - silverquiet 3y ago
        The author is not a journalist, but a doctor who studied public health issues.
paulsutter 3y ago
Yes each time we see these cookie warnings, we admire a system that does so much to our benefit
- FranzFerdiNaN 3y ago
  Just install some browser extension that automatically refuses them.
  - fmajid 3y ago
    The next step for the EU is Global Privacy Control, which is basically the old Do-Not_track header, but legally enforceable this time (the EU is not alone in this, it's already the law in California). If your browser sends that header, the website will have to not show you a cookie popup and treat it as a "Reject All" instead.
- troupo 3y ago
  Nothing in the law requires those cookie banners. If you don't agree, you can quote to me the exact passage in the GDPR where it talks about cookies, banners, or browsers. Or you can read what Github has to say about this: https://github.blog/2020-12-17-no-cookie-for-you/ https://github.blog/2020-12-17-no-cookie-for-you/
  - bengale 3y ago
    This is the exact problem though, noone really cares what the law says, they care that now they have annoying cookie banners. They don't blame the businesses for this; they blame the EU. The more of this they layer on the more ordinary people get irritated by the EU. This is how Brexit happened, remain tried to explain this stuff over and over again and no one wants to hear it. They want the cookie banners gone, or the bendy banana rules gone. The EU makes itself an easy target everytime they add more. If nothing else was learned from Brexit that should have been the thing. There actually isn't a point where you can spend enough money to convince people of this stuff when they don't want to hear it.
bengale 3y ago
> the general sentiment towards government regulation in europe, which is typically, "more, better". I'd need to be convinced that's true. More regulation was a huge part of the successful campaign to get the UK out of the EU. It seems to get effusive praise in places like this, but in daily business, I generally hear the term GDPR spat. Is anyone expecting the incoming car regulation around beeps and bongs every time you approach the speed limit to be received well by ordinary people? The USBC stuff that this article heaps praise on is a great example, techies love it, everyone else in everyday life I've only heard complain about it. Maybe it improves things long-term, but I can't remember hearing anyone say "more, better" about any of these things. I would say the overall sentiment I've heard is that there is a general suspicion that the reason European business lags so far behind the US is that we're held back. I don't think the handful of people that will be able to play Fortnite on their iPhones will change this. It certainly wont if they end up needing multiple app stores for their daily apps.
- xyzzy_plugh 3y ago
  > the successful campaign to get the UK out of the EU. Depending on your definition of success of course.
  - Ragnarork 3y ago
    Ah but the campaign was successful. The actual pullout and its consequences, on the other hand...
    - arethuza 3y ago
      Even the Daily Telegraph is having second thoughts about Brexit: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/02/28/uk-eu-are-being-pushed-back-together/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/02/28/uk-eu-are-be...
- mjburgess 3y ago
  note that since leaving the EU, UK regulators have been widely seen (by business and finance) to take a more risk-averse attitude on the EU across all new comptences brought in (eg, food standards, chemical standards, etc.). The 52% who voted to leave were not voting for a massive deregulated society. In most cases, actually the opposite: "bring back control"
immibis 3y ago
Nowhere is the general sentiment towards government regulation "more, better". The correct sentiment is both "more good ones, better" and "less bad ones, better"
- shrimp_emoji 3y ago
  But there is the general sentiment "less, better". And that's because it's right. That "good ones" is both subjective and a challenge tantamount to "write bug-free code". People aren't worthy of that kind of trust.
  - immibis 3y ago
    This comment explains it well: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39609172 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39609172 To summarize: Laws are like lines of code. Nobody in their right mind would put programs on a spectrum between "more lines" and "fewer lines". Lines of code that help do the necessary work are good, and unnecessary lines of code are bad. And so it is with regulations.
- hnben 3y ago
  "more, better" assumes that most regulations are perceived as good
weebull 3y ago
> So our lived experience of government regulation is, in large part, positive. I think I'd nuance it a bit. We see it as necessary. Necessary because otherwise powerful companies take advantage I think most can point to bad places in life for government regulations, but when the opposition is more powerful than most governments you need to fight with the most powerful thing you have.

drooopy 3y ago

Despite the rise of far right populist parties, Europe tends to lean more on the left side of the political spectrum compared to America, and corporate worship is a relatively new thing over here. People tend to have more faith in governments and treat companies with more distrust, compared to the US which seems to be the other way around.

Lutger 3y ago
For some definition of left. The interesting thing about the article is that all this EU regulatory control over corporations is in fact deeply capitalistic and the very reason for its existence, and in the corporations interest. Which is not what most EU citizens would consider being on the left of the political spectrum. The idea is: we need regulation to shape the market where businesses can compete freely to the advantage of both businesses and consumers. If we don't regulate, monopolistic corporation would threaten the single EU market. Or even more simplified: we need rules to have a free market. The US version (or one of the versions) of capitalism is more of a free-for-all, where the most important thing is to reduce regulation, not increase it. It seems to trust the judicial system more than the government.
- mr_tombuben 3y ago
  The European definition of "freedom of speech" interestingly also differs compared to the American one in a very similar way.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- mpol 3y ago
  Now you are twisting words :) Capitalism is like a cancer, it will grow endlessly and will become feudalism. Socialism is the government applying rules to capitalism, so it doesn't get out of control. US policy of neo-liberalism is growing in Europe too, which is giving problems.

realusername 3y ago

Especially that they don't seem to get that while the EU is very slow to act, once it's moving it's almost unstoppable. The time for Apple to get their point across isn't now but a decade ago.

dgellow 3y ago

To add to this, Apple is seen as a foreign company trying to cheat with local regulators

throwaway473825 3y ago

>EU citizens haven't been brainwashed into thinking that their government is their enemy, at least not to the same extent as the US. The same phenomenon can be seen in other areas, such as digital cash: https://youtube.com/watch?v=Dpu6G_UlSdM https://youtube.com/watch?v=Dpu6G_UlSdM On paper, digital cash is superior to both physical cash and digital bank money in almost all aspects, but many Americans oppose it anyway because they see their government as their enemy.

blitzar 3y ago
Yet digital cash is seen by actual true patriots as the solution to free themselves from the enemy the government.
- soco 3y ago
  As an European I fail to see how I could call myself patriot and at the same time distrust my own government - elected by me. Even if I didn't like the government, I'd still go with it because it's representing my country, and I'd also try to change the aspects which I don't like, again because it's my country. Those "actual true patriots" sound to me more like actual true selfish people which only want things happening according to their own ideas and needs.
  - blitzar 3y ago
    Stealing from above; > Distrust of government, and the limiting of its powers, is an American founding principle American Patriots believe defending themselves and their country from an oppressive government is true patriotism. It looks and sounds a lot like you think because taken to its logical conclusion thats exactly what it is.
  - maxwell 3y ago
    As a European, you almost certainly have better representation than most Americans. We haven't expanded the House of Representatives since 1929. We're approaching a million constituents per rep, an extreme outlier among OECD countries: https://www.amacad.org/ourcommonpurpose/enlarging-the-house/section/7 https://www.amacad.org/ourcommonpurpose/enlarging-the-house/... The reason Americans no longer trust Congress is because the Colonists had better representation per constituent (on paper) in British Parliament. Early U.S. representation was in line with Nordic countries today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_apportionment#Controversy_and_history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_ap...

graemep 3y ago

I am not sure they are wrong. It will be interesting to exactly what the EU does regarding Apple's malicious compliance with regard to allowing third party apps stores. I hope the EU comes down hard.

wouldbecouldbe 3y ago

It's suprising that the US still holds itself as the champion of the free market where it's more a corporate Oligarchy. It's clear Apple is trying to be as monopolistic as possible, understable from their perspective, but it's the EU job to regulate it, just a shame of the US fell so deep.

andsoitis 3y ago
> It's suprising that the US still holds itself as the champion of the free market where it's more a corporate Oligarchy. The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal (both American), have been publishing the Index of Economic Freedom since 1995 and don't put the USA in 25th position: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom#Rankings_and_scores https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Index_of_Economic_Freedom#Rank... In some areas the US is clearly the leader in championing the free market, such as the US Freedom of Navitation Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_navigation#United_States_Freedom_of_Navigation_Program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_navigation#United_S...
- jauntywundrkind 3y ago
  The Heritage Foundation & WSJ are both the tip of the spear, driving agenda to let big businesses do whatever they want. Even if America was clearly #1 in corporate freedom, they would never say so; their reason for existence is to commit America to letting big business be less regulated and you only can sell that by making our present stance look moderate or insufficient.

massysett 3y ago

“brainwashed” Distrust of government, and the limiting of its powers, is an American founding principle. It has resulted in federalism, separation of powers, a Constitution that protects property rights, and a Bill of Rights. This skepticism of government stemmed from the lived experience of the founders. That this founding principle still permeates American thinking and American life is something I would call culture, or an ethos. But it is not, in my experience, brainwashing.

Sammi 3y ago
"federalism, separation of powers, a Constitution that protects property rights, and a Bill of Rights." These things exist in the EU. Are you sure you are not brainwashed?
- buzzert 3y ago
  The US Constitution maintains that rights defined in the Bill of Rights pre-exist government ("inalienable"). The EU's Charter of Fundamental Rights defines rights granted to the people by the government. This is a subtle, but important difference.
  - schoen 3y ago
    I agree that the U.S. political tradition often regards our rights as recognized or discovered rather than granted, but the "inalienable" language is from the Declaration of Independence, not the Bill of Rights (and in the original it was "unalienable", which is now archaic).
  - piva00 3y ago
    I still can't reconcile the fact that "Life" is one of those inalienable rights while the US still has capital punishment (and that part of the population even celebrates having it).
    - buzzert 3y ago
      Capital punishment is not in the constitution, and it is regularly challenged legally. Many states are continuing to abolish it.

llm_trw 3y ago

I think there needs to be a word like "Paris syndrome" for when Americans meet actual Europeans and find out their politics. I've not met anyone who doesn't work in Brussels who thinks the EU isn't a dysfunctional pile of shit. The most spirited defense I've heard of it is "Well at least it keeps the Germans from invading again.". > The EU, it's better than genocide, by a bit - probably. -- Enthusiastic EU supporter, 2024.

bengale 3y ago
Great term. Sometimes, I think I must live on a different continent. It comes down to interest I think, for someone with a bunch of devices and online all the time it sounds great when the EU forces USBC through for example. Even though they don't generally have a good view of how ordinary people interpret it either. But at the far end something like the damage the common agricultural policy has for ordinary europeans is completely lost on them. There would never be any interest in how it impacts people.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  > for someone with a bunch of devices and online all the time it sounds great when the EU forces USBC through for example Have you never met an Apple user that carried around both Lightning and USB-C cables? This sort of sentiment confounds me, everyone I knew that had seen a Macbook was waiting on a USB-C iPhone for years. The only people I saw defending Lightning were Apple devotees online. > There would never be any interest in how it impacts people. You're free to use the extra comment space to explain it to us.
  - bengale 3y ago
    > Have you never met an Apple user that carried around both Lightning and USB-C cables? Have you ever met someone that just has an iPhone? There are considerably more of them than those carrying ipads and MacBooks and switches and the like.
    - smoldesu 3y ago

mrighele 3y ago

> EU citizens haven't been brainwashed into thinking that their government is their enemy I don't think that EU is so homogeneous in this regard. Ask that question to people from Italy and Finland and you will get quite different answers, and rightly so, because Italian and Finnish government, and in general state are quite different.

bojan 3y ago
Ask that question even within Italy or Finland and you're probably going to get different answers. However, ask an Italian or a Finn about an attitude towards consumers rights, and you're likely to end up with a similar answer.

ETH_start 3y ago

>EU citizens haven't been brainwashed into thinking that their government is their enemy The government is the most powerful entity in society. If brainwashing is to happen, it's almost certain to be done by the state and its allies. The last 80 years is a history of growing government power and public agreement with the narrative that expansive government control is good: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/social-spending-oecd-longrun https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/social-spending-oecd-long...

apwell23 3y ago

anyone who deoesn't think like me must be brainwashed.

mk89 3y ago

Careful, there are some Apple fanboys defending Apple for their beautiful UX that does things only to simplify and make life better, not to monetize - that's just a small side effect. PS: I own several Apple devices, but I can still recognize mafia methods.

classified 3y ago

> ...thinking the EU is somehow like the US... I suspect US-ians in general have a hard time realizing that the US is not the only planet in the universe. It is part of the culture to assume that the US way of doing things is universal.

carlosjobim 3y ago

> EU citizens haven't been brainwashed into thinking that their government is their enemy, at least not to the same extent as the US. US citizens haven't been brainwashed into thinking that their government is their friend, at least not to the same extent as the EU. Honestly, if you talk to real people within the EU, you'll find that maybe half of them are mostly against the EU. Real life is not the same as HN, because most citizens are not part of the "elite" that benefits the most from EU programs and systems. Like all governments there are very good things about the EU and very bad things. And somebody has to pay for their maintenance. You should be concerned if your thought patterns are healthy if you dismiss everybody with a different opinion as yours as "brainwashed". It doesn't help you in the long run.

bojan 3y ago
> Honestly, if you talk to real people within the EU, you'll find that maybe half of them are mostly against the EU. The polling seems to be proving you wrong. Even in the UK the attitude towards the EU seems to be net positive.
- carlosjobim 3y ago
  I wrote "if you talk to people", which is different from what a poll might say. Yes, it's anecdotal.
  - emptyfile 3y ago
    [dead]
  - piva00 3y ago
    I talk to people here in the EU, and most of my anecdotes support the EU, even the ones with reservations regarding it. So anecdotes don't matter in this discussion.
- willmadden 3y ago
  That is because most polling is not a representative sample of peoples' beliefs and is untrustworthy. The "mainstream" polling and coverage of Brexit is a great example, or the polling and coverage around the 2016 US presidential election.

bambax 3y ago

Yes. Also, Apple's market share in Europe is much lower than in the US. Many if not most Europeans wouldn't care if Apple ceased to exist today (or ceased to be able to sell its products in Europe). I certainly wouldn't. We have lots of options.

dspillett 3y ago

> What amazes and perplexes me is that Apple thinks it can effectively play politics against the EU and that somehow their customers will back them in the face of the "consequences" Apple applies, Given the general attitude of many ardent Apple fans, I don't find this so surprising. Especially as while the feature is attractive it is not yet used by a large proportion of the customer base (partly because it is not yet widely used by apps, though it is steadily becoming more so). I think what tipped it over the balance, so what they judged wrong, is the fact the braking of existing features was only going to happen in Europe. This made it hard for even the most cultish follower of the brand to paint the “well, it isn't a good feature anyway” picture because if that was the case the drop would have been universal. Counter intuitively: maybe if they had made the change globally, making it less obviously the result of a childish hissy-fit, they would have had more support from the core customer base.

quitit 3y ago

>somehow their customers will back them in the face of the "consequences" Apple applies Could you elaborate on this point? I'm not sure what their customers would even be able to do in apple's favour? Discussions on tax and anticompetitive activity is largely niche, and even here the facts don't get in the way of the court of public opinion: Take each of these major tax/anticompetitive headline grabbers from the last few years: Apple Owes $14.5 Billion in Back Taxes to Ireland, E.U. Says - New York Times. Apple hit with record €1.1bn fine in France - BBC Italian antitrust watchdog fines Apple, Amazon more than $225m - Al Jazeera. And it's about there where most readers stop, but what actually happened after this point? 1. The latest ruling in the 14BN irish tax saga was in Apple's favour, and since then it's taken around 3 years for the EU to file their appeal. So that is still on-going with the EU on the back foot. 2. The record French 1.1Bn antitrust fine, reduced to a third, and the appeals process is still incomplete. 3. The 225M fine from the Italian antitrust authority was struck down entirely. These are judgements from the EU's own courts, which lends credibility to the people who make cynical statements about the various EU agencies application of these fines. For this reason I scoff when I read an editorial which describes the USA as protectionist in comparison to the EU. The evidence is to the contrary.

capr 3y ago

ah yes, the "everybody who doesn't agree with me must be brainwashed" cliche