3 ms·

How are those ideas anti-consumer or anti-business? For a very long time now the operating system has been an app delivery platform for both businesses and con

How are those ideas anti-consumer or anti-business? For a very long time now the operating system has been an app delivery platform for both businesses and consumers, not an innovative technology in itself. Most apps are already built on more open source than proprietary code. Most infrastructure is already running linux. The purpose of regulation would simply be to better maintain these relationships with foundational pieces of software. I don't think even AT&T ever owned copper mines. Imagine a world where the quality of copper in your city was so terrible that you couldn't make a call ~15% the time because of hand wringing about cost or pseudo-philosophizing about big bad government overreach. That's the world we're living in right now with cybersecurity incidents, businesses unintentionally reinventing the wheel, consumers being duped into scams, etc.

hammyhavoc 1y ago
It's almost certainly someone attempting to debate via an LLM.
- ecb_penguin 1y ago
  You're cooked if you can't tell the difference between a person and an LLM. > Autistic and ADHD. Not terribly socially apt Is this why you thought I was an LLM?
  - hammyhavoc 1y ago
    You are cooked if this is how you debate and discuss as a human being. n.b. "almost certainly"
    - ecb_penguin 1y ago
      > You are cooked if this is how you debate and discuss as a human being. Critical thinking is more important than tone. Also you don't need to share your medical conditions with people. Most people don't do that...
ecb_penguin 1y ago
> How are those ideas anti-consumer or anti-business? Arbitrarily banning things you don't agree with doesn't support the development of new ideas, nor does it give customers the choices they want. > operating system has been an app delivery platform for both businesses and consumers, not an innovative technology in itself. Uhh, the innovation has been in app delivery. Regardless, you're not the arbitrator of what is innovative or not. Nor do you get to ban things because you don't think it's innovative enough. > Most infrastructure is already running linux Crazy how that managed to happen without regulatory enforcement. Kinda proving your own point wrong. > The purpose of regulation would simply be to better maintain these relationships with foundational pieces of software. If most infrastructure is already running Linux, why do we need taxes and bans to enforce this? > I don't think even AT&T ever owned copper mines. Imagine a world where the quality of copper in your city was so terrible that you couldn't make a call ~15% the time because of hand wringing about cost or pseudo-philosophizing about big bad government overreach. You know what would be worse? Government regulations that say even though this is shitty, this is required. > pseudo-philosophizing Stop adding silly words to try and make things sound smarter. > That's the world we're living in right now with cybersecurity incidents, businesses unintentionally reinventing the wheel, consumers being duped into scams, etc. I have no idea what this means. Reinventing the wheel is great, lol. It's how we get better wheels... Sorry but did you really think we peaked on wheels 2,000 years ago???

hammyhavoc 1y ago

It's almost certainly someone attempting to debate via an LLM.

ecb_penguin 1y ago
You're cooked if you can't tell the difference between a person and an LLM. > Autistic and ADHD. Not terribly socially apt Is this why you thought I was an LLM?
- hammyhavoc 1y ago
  You are cooked if this is how you debate and discuss as a human being. n.b. "almost certainly"
  - ecb_penguin 1y ago
    > You are cooked if this is how you debate and discuss as a human being. Critical thinking is more important than tone. Also you don't need to share your medical conditions with people. Most people don't do that...

ecb_penguin 1y ago

> How are those ideas anti-consumer or anti-business? Arbitrarily banning things you don't agree with doesn't support the development of new ideas, nor does it give customers the choices they want. > operating system has been an app delivery platform for both businesses and consumers, not an innovative technology in itself. Uhh, the innovation has been in app delivery. Regardless, you're not the arbitrator of what is innovative or not. Nor do you get to ban things because you don't think it's innovative enough. > Most infrastructure is already running linux Crazy how that managed to happen without regulatory enforcement. Kinda proving your own point wrong. > The purpose of regulation would simply be to better maintain these relationships with foundational pieces of software. If most infrastructure is already running Linux, why do we need taxes and bans to enforce this? > I don't think even AT&T ever owned copper mines. Imagine a world where the quality of copper in your city was so terrible that you couldn't make a call ~15% the time because of hand wringing about cost or pseudo-philosophizing about big bad government overreach. You know what would be worse? Government regulations that say even though this is shitty, this is required. > pseudo-philosophizing Stop adding silly words to try and make things sound smarter. > That's the world we're living in right now with cybersecurity incidents, businesses unintentionally reinventing the wheel, consumers being duped into scams, etc. I have no idea what this means. Reinventing the wheel is great, lol. It's how we get better wheels... Sorry but did you really think we peaked on wheels 2,000 years ago???