Should megacorps like amazon or google be abolished?
Or should the internet be a capitalistic dreamland like it is now?
Are you guys for or against the current monopoly on internet?
Daniel Brooks
Other urls found in this thread:
theguardian.com
twitter.com
Elijah Stewart
Nicholas Bell
I tend to prefer laissez-faire, but it has gotten to the point that [tech conglomerates] can potentially manipulate and manufacture public opinion, which is in no uncertain terms an existential threat to the state.
It will not and moreover cannot continue. Something will have to give. I wager that the side with MIRVs will not be the side to yield.
Parker Hughes
Age
Adrian Anderson
Reduce regulation, leave it alone.
>"But see we need regulation because...."
LEAVE IT FUCKING ALONE
Owen Robinson
Going after Amazon is just going to make Walmart more powerful. The best case against them applies as well to Microsoft and possibly IBM: To divest cloud infrastructure from the people who use said infrastructure. Because at this point AWS and Azure could (should?) be their own companies. It's sort of like the guy who sets the water rates in your town owning the biggest fucking yard.
Noah James
>this is real
Chase Fisher
Killing one corporation will just make another more powerful.
I don't give a shit about megacorps it's kinda fuckin hillarous actually that socialist cucks get triggered about "muh regulations"
Ian Moore
Yes. no company should have more than 30% of the market share.
that's because you've never lived under a monopolostic company tyranny.
I went there and it sucks ass.
Ryan Sanchez
Am a graphic design student, my entire life is controlled by Adobe and there's literally no Alternative.
Ryder Hughes
how do you feel being a slave for them?
Aiden Foster
Do you include copyright and patents as regulation?
Thomas Brown
Yes
Parker Myers
Now it's probably a bit too late to deregulate everything given the massive damage those things did.
Cameron Nelson
>adults that are 40
Nathan Evans
It's awful. Wish I could switch to Linux but can't. I don't really mind though because I could always change majors or something.
Oliver Torres
Amazon provides good value for many people. Convenient at home shopping with low prices and user review system.***
Google is the best at its services it provides: search, maps, calendar, etc. However, it spies on you and gives who knows what data to who.
I wouldn't break up either cause they're the best at what they do, but I would break up google because they are destroying our privacy.
***Amazon's "Rekognition" service is an exception, the same thoughts I have about google apply in this regard.
James Allen
Regulations are good for megacorps at the expense of everyone else. The only way they can sell shit products for ridiculous prices is to regulate competition out of the market.
Elijah Fisher
>controlled
how exactly? Do you actually pay a subscription? Even as a student? Do you not know how to use a crack?
also there's non-meme alternatives to plenty of the Adobe shit, like ON1 photo raw, Davinci Resolve, Corel Draw etc.
Ryder Barnes
Everything at Amazon is interconnected (exception being some subsidiaries that have relative autonomy). It is not possible to break it up without making everything vastly more inefficient and expensive.
Xavier Young
some of those corporations have incomes exceeding those of some nation states
what would be wrong with having multiple amazons? or multiple search engines? remember the days of lycos, excite, yahoo, altavista, etc? I understand competition may sometimes lead to elimination of some competitors, but full monopoly is bad.
we might bitch about the nonstop amd vs intel, or amd vs nvidia, or chrome vs ie vs firefox threads, but when it's balanced is when innovation occurs, prices are low, and customers win.
warren may have good intentions, but you have to be careful how you do a breakup. see what happened with the baby bells after the at&t breakup. each became a monopoly in its own territory, much like cable companies.
that's why I was wary when they were considering breaking up Microsoft after the antitrust case. if you do it wrong, you'd have a monopoly in OS, another monopoly in word processors, and another in spreadsheets, and so on, instead of a monopoly in everything.
Juan Ramirez
Monopolies are only bad if they have some way of keeping competition out, otherwise the moment they raise their prices or lower their quality they lose most of their market share to a competitor.
Henry Gomez
>Monopolies are only bad if they have some way of keeping competition out
Called "economies of scale" and "technical expertise".
If a monopoly occurs, you need significant amounts of capital to produce a competing start up or nurture a small business to the same competing level.
Austin Gutierrez
>if you do it wrong, you'd have a monopoly in OS, another monopoly in word processors, and another in spreadsheets, and so on, instead of a monopoly in everything.
That could be helpful due to the specialisation that is created from it though. You'd get monopolies focusing on those specific parts and that could make those specific parts reach a higher standard.