5 ms·

I don't think bureaucrats can build a successful cloud by enforcing laws, adding even more regulations, making policies and using subsidies. This is not how th

I don't think bureaucrats can build a successful cloud by enforcing laws, adding even more regulations, making policies and using subsidies. This is not how the market likes to work. There has to be a demand and the free market forces will build a supply. Governments can help by reducing regulation and bureaucracy, reducing taxes.

threeseed 2y ago
> There has to be a demand and the free market forces will build a supply Not in all cases it doesn't. If the return on investment isn't there or if companies are unable to fulfil the demand then the market has failed. Recent example of this has been EVs where regulation needed to step in to force the market forward.
- DeathArrow 2y ago
  >If the return on investment isn't there or if companies are unable to fulfil the demand then the market has failed. If there's no demand, there's no problem. Also there's no money to be made. If there's demand there will always be companies to supply that demand. Of course, it takes a time. Politics shouldn't dictate to economy. >Recent example of this has been EVs where regulation needed to step in to force the market forward Then why should people be forced to use EVs instead of whatever they like? That is not freedom.
  - scarby2 2y ago
    Because we have wider goals as a society that go beyond absolute freedom. However things like EV incentives don't make you less free, you can still buy whatever you want.
  - eesmith 2y ago
    > If there's demand there will always be companies to supply that demand. I want to walk around town without cameras tracking me. Can companies supply my demand? I want PFAS and microplastics out of the evironment. Can companies supply my demand? I want net-zero CO2 emissions in all the products I buy. Can companies supply my demand? How do I trust they are not green-washing? Do I depend on even more companies? How do I trust those companies? Sure seems simpler to have the government enforce privacy and pollution laws. > Politics shouldn't dictate to economy. Which means you think William Wilberforce's most famous work was completely wrong. > Then why should people be forced to use EVs instead of whatever they like? You should consider how government-subsidized oil production and distribution has forced you to use fossil fuel cars instead of whatever you like. You should consider even more how government-subsidized planning forces you to use a car in the first place, and often closed off alternative solutions like walking, bike, and mass transit.
Wilder7977 2y ago
Policies are often used to create markets or - like in this case is propose - to create that demand. The article makes the argument that free market failed to deliver in this sector in Europe. One of the explanations is that once you lag behind competitors, if policies don't force to value specific parameters that can be fulfilled only by other competitors, no competitors will join the market because nobody is going to choose them. So the author argues for example to impose regulation for public tenders such as "must be subject to only EU laws". This creates a demand, which is not currently matching any offer in the market and creates market incentives for new players to compete. So regulations can absolutely work where "free" market fails (quotes because even the big 3 are/were pumped full of money by government/defense contracts).
eesmith 2y ago
Free markets like to make money for capital holders, and tend towards a monopoly or oligopoly as that maximizes profit extraction. Name a free market where there is an economy of scale and network effect, which does not tend towards monopoly or oligopoly. More fundamentally, if (say) Germany wants to move all of its government operations off of US-based IT, should it wait until the market has provided a solution? Or should it do like all governments have always done, and change the marketplace? Nor is this unique to governments. Some of my clients require me to agree to their ethical practices, like "no child labor." They are using their purchasing power to change the marketplace. Why do the countries with higher taxes and government regulations and policies over health care have better overall health outcomes than those with lower taxes and regulations? There is a demand for clean beaches. Where is the free market for pollution control?
- mike_hearn 2y ago
  The topic we're discussing would seem to undermine your claim, as cloud is neither a monopoly nor an oligopoly despite having scale and network effects.
  - eesmith 2y ago
    Could you explain then how so many European governments ended up one of a handful of US clouds (Amazon, Microsoft and Google)? Almost reason I can think of comes down to scaling or network effects. I say "almost" because I've thought of a couple more: - it's already a Microsoft shop and it's hard to change? Lock-in effect. - you never get fired for choosing IBM, err, AWS? I don't have a name for this effect, though it seems related to scaling. Note that "monopoly" does not mean there is only a single provider. "De Beers controlled 80% to 85% of rough diamond distribution and was considered a monopoly" during the 20th century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers This is because I'm using the legal definition of monopoly, not the economics one. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly > In economics, a monopoly is a single seller. In law, a monopoly is a business entity that has significant market power, that is, the power to charge overly high prices, which is associated with unfair price raises.

threeseed 2y ago

> There has to be a demand and the free market forces will build a supply Not in all cases it doesn't. If the return on investment isn't there or if companies are unable to fulfil the demand then the market has failed. Recent example of this has been EVs where regulation needed to step in to force the market forward.

DeathArrow 2y ago
>If the return on investment isn't there or if companies are unable to fulfil the demand then the market has failed. If there's no demand, there's no problem. Also there's no money to be made. If there's demand there will always be companies to supply that demand. Of course, it takes a time. Politics shouldn't dictate to economy. >Recent example of this has been EVs where regulation needed to step in to force the market forward Then why should people be forced to use EVs instead of whatever they like? That is not freedom.
- scarby2 2y ago
  Because we have wider goals as a society that go beyond absolute freedom. However things like EV incentives don't make you less free, you can still buy whatever you want.
- eesmith 2y ago
  > If there's demand there will always be companies to supply that demand. I want to walk around town without cameras tracking me. Can companies supply my demand? I want PFAS and microplastics out of the evironment. Can companies supply my demand? I want net-zero CO2 emissions in all the products I buy. Can companies supply my demand? How do I trust they are not green-washing? Do I depend on even more companies? How do I trust those companies? Sure seems simpler to have the government enforce privacy and pollution laws. > Politics shouldn't dictate to economy. Which means you think William Wilberforce's most famous work was completely wrong. > Then why should people be forced to use EVs instead of whatever they like? You should consider how government-subsidized oil production and distribution has forced you to use fossil fuel cars instead of whatever you like. You should consider even more how government-subsidized planning forces you to use a car in the first place, and often closed off alternative solutions like walking, bike, and mass transit.

Wilder7977 2y ago

Policies are often used to create markets or - like in this case is propose - to create that demand. The article makes the argument that free market failed to deliver in this sector in Europe. One of the explanations is that once you lag behind competitors, if policies don't force to value specific parameters that can be fulfilled only by other competitors, no competitors will join the market because nobody is going to choose them. So the author argues for example to impose regulation for public tenders such as "must be subject to only EU laws". This creates a demand, which is not currently matching any offer in the market and creates market incentives for new players to compete. So regulations can absolutely work where "free" market fails (quotes because even the big 3 are/were pumped full of money by government/defense contracts).

eesmith 2y ago

Free markets like to make money for capital holders, and tend towards a monopoly or oligopoly as that maximizes profit extraction. Name a free market where there is an economy of scale and network effect, which does not tend towards monopoly or oligopoly. More fundamentally, if (say) Germany wants to move all of its government operations off of US-based IT, should it wait until the market has provided a solution? Or should it do like all governments have always done, and change the marketplace? Nor is this unique to governments. Some of my clients require me to agree to their ethical practices, like "no child labor." They are using their purchasing power to change the marketplace. Why do the countries with higher taxes and government regulations and policies over health care have better overall health outcomes than those with lower taxes and regulations? There is a demand for clean beaches. Where is the free market for pollution control?

mike_hearn 2y ago
The topic we're discussing would seem to undermine your claim, as cloud is neither a monopoly nor an oligopoly despite having scale and network effects.
- eesmith 2y ago
  Could you explain then how so many European governments ended up one of a handful of US clouds (Amazon, Microsoft and Google)? Almost reason I can think of comes down to scaling or network effects. I say "almost" because I've thought of a couple more: - it's already a Microsoft shop and it's hard to change? Lock-in effect. - you never get fired for choosing IBM, err, AWS? I don't have a name for this effect, though it seems related to scaling. Note that "monopoly" does not mean there is only a single provider. "De Beers controlled 80% to 85% of rough diamond distribution and was considered a monopoly" during the 20th century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Beers This is because I'm using the legal definition of monopoly, not the economics one. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly > In economics, a monopoly is a single seller. In law, a monopoly is a business entity that has significant market power, that is, the power to charge overly high prices, which is associated with unfair price raises.