6 ms·
I understand the AI context, but this is dangerously anticompetitive for other search engines. This is a dangerous precedent for the internet. Business conglom
by arnaudsm 2y ago
I understand the AI context, but this is dangerously anticompetitive for other search engines.
This is a dangerous precedent for the internet. Business conglomerates have been controlling most of the web, but refusing basic interoperability is even worse.
- zooq_ai 2y agoThere is nothing preventing search companies paying the same $60 Million to license content. If reddit had exclusive agreement, it would be anti-competive. This is classic HN anti-Google tirade (and downvoting facts, logic and concepts of free market)
- pluc 2y agoPaying 60 million to every site you want to index is also a bad precedent to set. Why can Reddit get paid and XYZ can't?
- zooq_ai 2y agoAnyone can ask for licensing deal. I'm sure NY Times, Conde Nest all have licensing deals. Mr. Beast signed a deal with Amazon. Joe Rogan with Spotify. Why is it hard to understand? Even HN can get a licensing deal if they want to. If you are producing content, you have every right to do what you want to with the content.
- SlackingOff123 2y agoReddit is not producing any content; its users are.
- zooq_ai 2y agoNot the point. If users don't like it they can go somewhere else to post. For practical purposes, reddit can do whatever they want with users post. It's right there in TOS
- renewiltord 2y agoUsers sign a deal to give Reddit the content.
- spixy 2y agomaybe Reddit has more value than XYZ?
- not_wyoming 2y ago> There is nothing preventing search companies paying the same $60 Million to license content. Yes, actually, there is - having $60m to throw around. "Barriers to entry often cause or aid the existence of monopolies and oligopolies" [0]. Monopolies and oligopolies are definitionally the opposite of free market forces. This is quite literally Econ 101. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barriers_to_entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barriers_to_entry
- saghm 2y agoNot to mention the fact that if this became commonplace, other websites might start charging as well
- zooq_ai 2y agoHaving a Monopoly != Anti-Competitive. Having Barriers to Entry != Anti-competitive Yes, large players have advantages of Economies of Scale. Just because you can't run an Airline because you don't have money to buy an Airplane isn't anti-competitive. Today Microsoft, Apple, OpenAI, Google, Amazon all can afford those piddly $60m to license from reddit. Not Anti-competitive at all. But saddened by how much corporate-hate by HNers destroys their credibility in debating these thing. Go ahead downvote
- not_wyoming 2y agoIf you check citations, you'd find the sentence preceding my excerpt on barriers to entry: "Because barriers to entry protect incumbent firms and restrict competition in a market, they can contribute to distortionary prices and are therefore most important when discussing antitrust policy." Antitrust policy then links to a page on competition law: "Competition law is the field of law that promotes or seeks to maintain market competition by regulating anti-competitive conduct by companies." [0] So yes, I'd downvote you if I could, but HN doesn't allow downvotes - which is honestly pretty fitting in the context of this conversation. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law
- 2y ago
- not_wyoming 2y agoJuiciest update I’ve ever gotten to share: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/05/technology/google-antitrust-ruling.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/05/technology/google-antitru...