CPLX

28 ms·

451.
by CPLX 1y ago
The divergence between the interests of shareholders and the actions of a corporation in cases like this is a textbook example of a well established concept: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_proble.
452.
by CPLX 1y ago
Considering the cases were prosecuted in collaboration across both the Biden and Trump administrations, and decided by longstanding federal judges, then, no, these are not accurately characterized as politically motivated except insofar as
453.
by CPLX 1y ago
> it is irrelevant of whether publisher earns 75% or 30% of the total revenue Of course it matters if a middleman is skimming off 70% of the revenue in a given market. > it is incredibly efficient On what planet is a loss of 70% of th
454.
by CPLX 1y ago
> Google is not anti-competitive. While you're welcome to this opinion you might want to address the fact that Google has recently lost THREE separate trials, each of which individually and separately produced a verdict that they ar
455.
by CPLX 1y ago
This is not correct and a common misconception, on both sides of the argument. Both monopolies and monopolistic actions are illegal, each alone is enough to be in violation of the law.
456.
by CPLX 1y ago
> most of them seem to be less useful than ever and yet they are making more money than ever This is the classic sign of a company that has achieved monopoly. They don't serve their customers any more because they don't have
457.
by CPLX 1y ago
> Look at the hundreds of millions wasted on the Windows / IE monopoly trial The fact that we actually were enforcing antitrust at the time absolutely prevented MS from getting a strangehold on the consumer internet as it was taking
458.
by CPLX 1y ago
The reason monopolies are illegal is precisely because they force people to be completely dependent on a third party. Is a farmer "a failure who shouldn't have a business" if some asshole buys up every single railroad, port,
459.
by CPLX 1y ago
They've had zoom.com since at least 2019 or so. It used to just be a redirect to Zoom.us though they've made a switch since then.
460.
by CPLX 1y ago
I don't hate jargon. I actually think jargon, as a concept, is clearly incredibly useful. When done right, you can take ordinary English words that people think they understand but we all don't agree on, and replace them with sp
461.
by CPLX 1y ago
From 1984 to 2024
462.
by CPLX 1y ago
I mean you can believe in cryptocurrency. But why do courts have to believe in it?
463.
by CPLX 1y ago
But that’s not true. An options pool containing shares owned by the company is the same from a “how much of the company do I own” perspective as unissued or even uncontemplated shares. The only real advantage to the options pool is ease of
464.
by CPLX 1y ago
I once had to work with a consultant who was the most over the top bullshit artist I had ever seen in my life. Their line of work was getting "out of it" execs to feel like he understood the online world and getting paid to create
465.
by CPLX 1y ago
Because they want to punish and humiliate the establishment that let this happen and so they pick the person that seems to also hate and be hated by the establishment.
466.
by CPLX 2y ago
You have cause and effect backwards. Cars aren’t some static thing that you grow on trees and sell, where like American trees grow bigger cars. The question you should be asking is why American manufacturers don’t target the EU market more
467.
by CPLX 2y ago
Have you been to Europe? There are American cars everywhere, though yes they don’t sell as well there as European cars do here. > Europeans don't tend to buy American cars because… Wait until you realize that the EU tariff on Americ
468.
by CPLX 2y ago
They already are. In addition it’s precisely because of tariffs (of which there have been many on cars and SUVs long before all this) that we have tons and tons of foreign brands actually building cars in the US.
469.
by CPLX 2y ago
Dartmouth is also famously the "conservative" Ivy.
470.
by CPLX 2y ago
It's certainly annoying but it's not all that big of a deal. Tens of thousands of people lose IDs and wallets every year and manage to get on the plane home anyways. I've seen people go through it they use common sense means
471.
by CPLX 2y ago
I was reading this and thinking, what if there’s no such thing as scale. Like, obviously there is in some sense, but what if there’s some kind of theory of relativity for scale as well, maybe scale is relative to gravity and gravity isn’t c
472.
by CPLX 2y ago
> Google didn't even have any real lock-in for years, but it still owned consumer mindshare, which gave it the vast majority of search traffic, which made it one of the most valuable companies in the world. This isn't correct a
473.
by CPLX 2y ago
The article makes it pretty clear that China is the jurisdiction that is the hardest to evade.
474.
by CPLX 2y ago
Browsers seem to lose their mind when presented with not HTTPS content these days right?
475.
by CPLX 2y ago
> The only people negatively affected are those moderately wealthy who are unwilling to pay the charge for improved times and highly dislike using public transport. The people really negatively affected and the ones screaming their heads
476.
by CPLX 2y ago
No, they don’t. This story you’re telling is ridiculous. There are not significant numbers of low income people driving to Manhattan below 60th street in carpool groups with monthly parking spaces. To the extent there’s any truth to this at
477.
by CPLX 2y ago
It's literally the opposite of this. It takes money from the relatively well off, namely people who have cars and can afford to park them in Manhattan where a parking space costs ~$50+ a day on average, and sends it to the MTA who crea
478.
by CPLX 2y ago
> Capital follows the path of least resistance. Huh? Capital doesn't have agency. People either follow laws or break them. The argument against crypto is that it's primarily a tool for breaking the law. Which, you know, is fine
479.
by CPLX 2y ago
> if you’re not the audience for that use case then that has nothing to do with anyone else You just described evading laws governing money transfers again using a lot more words. Everyone gets it. Crypto is useful for evading laws. Howe
480.
by CPLX 2y ago
Same day money transfers are a pretty well solved problem at this point via Wise or PayPal or Payoneer or SWIFT or plenty of other ways. Sure they're subject to KYC and so on, but that's kind of the point. Which is that crypto sti

More ›