3 ms·

The passage banning “unfair competition” is utterly marvellous: A trader may not, by pursuing a dishonest practice, force his competitors to choose between

by fwlr 20d ago

The passage banning “unfair competition” is utterly marvellous: A trader may not, by pursuing a dishonest practice, force his competitors to choose between its adoption or the loss of their trade. A method of competition [is ‘unfair’ when it] casts upon one's competitors the burden of the loss of business unless they will descend to a practice which they are under a powerful moral compulsion not to adopt, even though it is not criminal… It is true that the statute does not authorize regulation which has no purpose other than that of relieving merchants from troublesome competition … But here the competitive method is shown to exploit [those] who are unable to protect themselves. It employs a device [that has] met with condemnation throughout the community. Without inquiring whether [other criminal statues apply] … it is clear that the practice is of the sort which the common law and criminal statutes have long deemed contrary to public policy. For these reasons a large share of the industry holds out against the device, despite ensuing loss in trade, or bows reluctantly to what it brands unscrupulous. It would seem a gross perversion of the normal meaning of the word … to hold that the method is not 'unfair.' Apply it immediately!

homeonthemtn 20d ago
^ further evidence that the problem with democracy isn't democracy, it's that we lack politicians willing to enforce it
- collingreen 20d ago
  Isn't that just the human problem for every possible form of government?
- Tractor8626 20d ago
  Just elect correct politicians doh
  - zhivota 20d ago
    I was reading a post about the life of a congressman and it's actually horrifying, on the level of the stores of salarymen in Japan who sacrifice everything for the company. For me personally being famous is a curse already, pile on top of that the endless fundraising, constant travel, the reality that you're a tiny cog in a huge party machine, and it's a recipe for only attracting the type who has a plan to parlay it into something else - a higher office, a lucrative career in lobbying, outright corruption, etc. We're not going to get good government without addressing this issue, and we can't because of another issue, ad nauseam.
verdverm 20d ago
> For these reasons a large share of the industry holds out against the device This is where I stop agreeing, there are some, not large parts any more; not because they were forced to adopt it, but because it has finally become useful and an ROI. This is most evident in pull request reviews and root-cause analysis, both tasks they accel at without the generated code some people bemoan. If you aren't using it for this, you are doing a disservice to yourself and the quality of your code. Because more of industry feels this way, I do not believe the 'unfair' part (compelled to use it or lose your trade) will hold up, we want to use it because it makes us better at our trade
- fwlr 19d ago
  “If you aren't using it for this, you are doing a disservice to yourself and the quality of your code” I bow reluctantly to this device I consider unscrupulous.
  - verdverm 19d ago
    When it consistently and regularly catches bugs that humans and other review agents miss, the benefit is quite clear and it becomes obvious there are more defects in your code than you realize, might be much more than that 1:90 rule of thumb. It's often less bugs and more about edge case handling, we all skimp on those exhaustive cases because it is exhausting while the agents never tire and are more than happy to work through them. It's comment wall is uncovering enough that we are going to brave the burnout fodder while we work on a second agent to make the adjustments after we leave our own comments on the clanker comments. It's weird writing that sentence, I've generally been against the hype train, but they have become good enough there are real wins on the code review side. So yes, I will maintain you are doing a disservice to yourself, your code, and your users by not using a thing that catches bugs before you publish them. I still care about the quality when I'm putting it in other people's hands. Ai is now clearly facilitating improved code quality - when used on the review side.
- fdupress 19d ago
  But hang on. None of this argument is about companies or people using AI being unfair in their practices. It is about companies and people training models and building AI products being unfair in their practice. (By forcing others to choose between adopting unscrupulous practices or dying.)
DoctorOetker 19d ago
"A trader may not, by pursuing a dishonest practice, force his competitors to choose between its adoption or the loss of their trade." Why wasn't this used to stop offshoring of jobs? For each type of industry, which company did it first?

by fwlr 20d ago

homeonthemtn 20d ago

^ further evidence that the problem with democracy isn't democracy, it's that we lack politicians willing to enforce it

collingreen 20d ago
Isn't that just the human problem for every possible form of government?
Tractor8626 20d ago
Just elect correct politicians doh
- zhivota 20d ago
  I was reading a post about the life of a congressman and it's actually horrifying, on the level of the stores of salarymen in Japan who sacrifice everything for the company. For me personally being famous is a curse already, pile on top of that the endless fundraising, constant travel, the reality that you're a tiny cog in a huge party machine, and it's a recipe for only attracting the type who has a plan to parlay it into something else - a higher office, a lucrative career in lobbying, outright corruption, etc. We're not going to get good government without addressing this issue, and we can't because of another issue, ad nauseam.

verdverm 20d ago

> For these reasons a large share of the industry holds out against the device This is where I stop agreeing, there are some, not large parts any more; not because they were forced to adopt it, but because it has finally become useful and an ROI. This is most evident in pull request reviews and root-cause analysis, both tasks they accel at without the generated code some people bemoan. If you aren't using it for this, you are doing a disservice to yourself and the quality of your code. Because more of industry feels this way, I do not believe the 'unfair' part (compelled to use it or lose your trade) will hold up, we want to use it because it makes us better at our trade

fwlr 19d ago
“If you aren't using it for this, you are doing a disservice to yourself and the quality of your code” I bow reluctantly to this device I consider unscrupulous.
- verdverm 19d ago
  When it consistently and regularly catches bugs that humans and other review agents miss, the benefit is quite clear and it becomes obvious there are more defects in your code than you realize, might be much more than that 1:90 rule of thumb. It's often less bugs and more about edge case handling, we all skimp on those exhaustive cases because it is exhausting while the agents never tire and are more than happy to work through them. It's comment wall is uncovering enough that we are going to brave the burnout fodder while we work on a second agent to make the adjustments after we leave our own comments on the clanker comments. It's weird writing that sentence, I've generally been against the hype train, but they have become good enough there are real wins on the code review side. So yes, I will maintain you are doing a disservice to yourself, your code, and your users by not using a thing that catches bugs before you publish them. I still care about the quality when I'm putting it in other people's hands. Ai is now clearly facilitating improved code quality - when used on the review side.
fdupress 19d ago
But hang on. None of this argument is about companies or people using AI being unfair in their practices. It is about companies and people training models and building AI products being unfair in their practice. (By forcing others to choose between adopting unscrupulous practices or dying.)

DoctorOetker 19d ago

"A trader may not, by pursuing a dishonest practice, force his competitors to choose between its adoption or the loss of their trade." Why wasn't this used to stop offshoring of jobs? For each type of industry, which company did it first?