3 ms·
This is where it's not helpful to talk generically about this issue. I might agree with you on some of the clauses in Android contracts, for instance, but the
by magicalist 12y ago
This is where it's not helpful to talk generically about this issue.
I might agree with you on some of the clauses in Android contracts, for instance, but the EU's previously proposed idea mandating cycling through different spammy vertical shopping search engines at the top of the search results helps no one but those spammy search engines, artificially propping a company up for years for the the appearance of competition.
See declan's excellent post below: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9382109 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9382109
- azakai 12y agoDebating details can be useful, but that is the previously proposed idea. Until we know what the current proposals will be, we don't have the details to talk concretely. So all we can do for now is talk about the general issue.
- magicalist 12y agoThat's fair, but my point is that it's easy to talk about "oh, the market should be more competitive", but it turns out finding ways to do that is incredibly difficult without also hobbling the original thing to the point that it becomes simply not a good product. It's also perfectly possible to propose solutions of our own for the purposes of discussion :) edit: > Debating details can be useful, but that is the previously proposed idea it's also worth pointing out that the cycling vertical shopping search site links proposal was apparently rejected not because it was flawed but because those vertical shopping sites didn't think it went far enough.