3 ms·
That’s a rather silly view to take. We have a phenomenon called “the first mover advantage” for a reason. Plenty of other markets and businesses operate just f
by avianlyric 10mo ago
That’s a rather silly view to take. We have a phenomenon called “the first mover advantage” for a reason.
Plenty of other markets and businesses operate just fine while operating in an environment that makes protecting individual innovation functionally impossible. Just look at any related to fast fashion (not that I think the fast fashion market is a healthy phenomenon) or any commodities market. Or for that matter, most of the software industry.
The incentive for creating features should be to remain relevant and competitive. It shouldn’t be to build moats and war chests.
- websiteapi 10mo ago"plenty of other markets" have way smaller margins and are not nearly as robust an industry as software.
- avianlyric 10mo agoAre you trying suggest that Apple’s margins are so small that they need state protection? Or that Apple can’t compete if they’re not able to tightly lock down every aspect of their ecosystem?
- stefan_ 10mo agoI don't understand. Robust markets don't have large margins. Why would a regulator even want markets with enormous margin? That's usually market failure.
- tekknik 10mo agoPharmaceuticals have very large margins.
- avianlyric 10mo agoMost people also complain about how pharmaceuticals are greedy corporations that seek to exploit monopoly status for profits above human health. Hardly a good example of a well functioning market.
- tekknik 10mo agoComplaining doesn’t mean action. To affect prices people need to vote with their wallet, and they won’t do that when their life is on the line. Or to put it another way, find an alternative.