3 ms·

Isn't that already illegal in many countries (dumping)? The issue is that AWS is embedded in many governments and there is no appetite to do anything about it.

Isn't that already illegal in many countries (dumping)? The issue is that AWS is embedded in many governments and there is no appetite to do anything about it. If a country started proceedings against AWS they'd risk their country infrastructure going down, so it is a no go. I wonder why this has not been considered as national security risk and frankly negligence.

s1artibartfast 5mo ago
Dumping is selling at a loss. The quote clearly describes selling for a profit. Aws marginal cost is below the internal production price of the buyer
- SoftTalker 5mo ago
  Amazon "operated at a loss" for years, avoiding income taxes, as they dumped all their profit into building their infrastructure, which they are now selling for less than anyone else can because the taxpayers effectively subsidized it.
  - s1artibartfast 5mo ago
    That isnt dumping. There is a big difference between running a company at a loss and selling a good at a loss. This is exactly what we want our tax structure to incentivise. Investing in the future for growth and cheaper goods.
    - SoftTalker 5mo ago
      Yes, I should not have used the word dumping there as it's not in the same context as its usage upthread. I just meant they plowed all their profits into R&D and infrastructure growth, and as a result had very little or even negative taxable income. They operated at a loss, but it was contrived. They had revenue pouring in. While I agree we want to incentivize investing in future capacity, I don't think we intend that incentive to be used to create monopolies. As with many things, what's good at small scales can be bad at huge scales.
      - s1artibartfast 5mo ago
        The tax situation isnt what created monopolies. It was and is available to all. It is unclear what is bad about it, as long as they provide a better or cheaper product than the competitor. If they are ilegally preventing competition, then regulatory action should be swift. Otherwise, it is a win-win and the consumer is getting a better product than others could provide. This is the classic walmart scenario.
        SoftTalker 5mo ago
        It is win-win until there's no competition left and they can now raise prices and enshitify their products with impunity.

s1artibartfast 5mo ago

Dumping is selling at a loss. The quote clearly describes selling for a profit. Aws marginal cost is below the internal production price of the buyer

SoftTalker 5mo ago
Amazon "operated at a loss" for years, avoiding income taxes, as they dumped all their profit into building their infrastructure, which they are now selling for less than anyone else can because the taxpayers effectively subsidized it.
- s1artibartfast 5mo ago
  That isnt dumping. There is a big difference between running a company at a loss and selling a good at a loss. This is exactly what we want our tax structure to incentivise. Investing in the future for growth and cheaper goods.
  - SoftTalker 5mo ago
    Yes, I should not have used the word dumping there as it's not in the same context as its usage upthread. I just meant they plowed all their profits into R&D and infrastructure growth, and as a result had very little or even negative taxable income. They operated at a loss, but it was contrived. They had revenue pouring in. While I agree we want to incentivize investing in future capacity, I don't think we intend that incentive to be used to create monopolies. As with many things, what's good at small scales can be bad at huge scales.
    - s1artibartfast 5mo ago
      The tax situation isnt what created monopolies. It was and is available to all. It is unclear what is bad about it, as long as they provide a better or cheaper product than the competitor. If they are ilegally preventing competition, then regulatory action should be swift. Otherwise, it is a win-win and the consumer is getting a better product than others could provide. This is the classic walmart scenario.
      - SoftTalker 5mo ago
        It is win-win until there's no competition left and they can now raise prices and enshitify their products with impunity.