maynarkh

It's not even about running a business, it's about the funding. Idiots have all the money.

Monopolies are not a yes or no thing. Since Apple has a large enough market share that it is able to strangle competitors just through having that kind of market share, it is having a monopolistic effect on various markets.

For example, the smartphone market, if the smartphone market was perfectly competitive, if I didn't like Apple's and Google's business, I would be able to go to a third seller and get similar products. If I didn't like them, I could go to a fourth, and so on until it becomes meaningless. Like the market for actual apples for example.

Since that is not true, Apple is distorting the smartphone market with its large market share, making it have monopolistic tendencies.

As long as the right concept wins - yes.

I think the one aspect that has the potential to kill the whole concept is the limit on how much one person can own. There would be little to no point in using it, since the potential advantage of no fees or bank nonsense is more than offset by the inconvenience of not being able to get my salary in it.

If there is no limit, we basically nationalized commercial banking, or at least eliminated the concept of banks providing convenience as opposed to interest as a service. I'm not sure if that's a bad idea, given that we seem to have a major debt crisis every ten years, usually stemming from insane lending from banks. Maybe not all at once though. My uneducated opinion is that it would be great if we could impose a limit, and gradually raise it until it reaches a point where it is meaningless.

It's the law though. If you do business in the EU, you can only use data given to you for the exact purpose it was given to you for. If you want to sell it, you have to ask permission.

Deepfakes tend to stick to their message and be less duplicitous.

All these start-ups are in the US for a reason and it’s not just immigration.

It's in the US because VC firms are in the US, and VC firms are in the US because the US has an economy that produces billionaires, and that is mostly based on the USD being the reserve currency of the world, which is mostly based on the post-WWII world order.

The US was actually more innovative when it was more regulated. The biggest innovations in the US came from the public sector. Deregulation is not conductive to innovation.

I don't know about the AI act. If it turns out anything like the DMA, it's probably a good thing. The EU seems to have got a sense for creating regulation that curtails Big Tech while still enabling small actors.

You do understand whole markets are hurt by big monopolies.

So this news piece is saying TASS (Russian state media) is its primary source for a piece that should be German domestic news. I couldn't find other sources with a quick DDG. Also, it's a not really well known site, with an AI image as the background, this feels like some low grade narrative pushing.

Still, fuck Tesla and their abhorrent labour practices.

It's over nine thousand!

I mean it's not like putting healthcare or education or other basic social services under private ownership is a good idea either, but that's where the US seems to be headed.

Imagine in 20 years, the Hobby Lobby Carrier Battle Group will no longer sound absurd.

Any kind of vertical integration is harmful to competitive markets.