JFitzgerald

I’m not sure why you say that. Bitcoin has not really changed since it was introduced has it?

And compared to the US gov budget, we are not talking about a big cost. Look at what printing bills and minting coins cost every year, as well as transporting and storing them.

Even a broken clock is right etc etc.

Kushner did not think this up, but was on the right track to be interested in it. The US needs a blockchain based official currency. The sooner the better.

And along with it outlaw any other digital currencies. Things like Bitcoin are fine for a store of value, but not for use as an actual currency.

There are many potential uses for 5G besides downloading movies.

https://www.5gradar.com/features/what-is-5g-these-use-cases-reveal-all

OK … so regarding T-Mobile, didn’t you just undermine your own point?

Also I know for a fact Chicago was one of the first places Verizon offered 5G.

Where do you live?

And that court’s ruling is subject to a higher court, which may reverse the ruling or let it stand.

A ruling isn’t final until appeals have been exhausted.

This isn’t about normal, voluntary, turnover. This article is about the people being dismissed or disciplined regarding the toxic workplace culture.

I would be curious to know how many people left the company because of these issues. Which is basically impossible to figure out.

I like this new Roomba, we have an older one and it’s been fantastic.

The self-emptying feature is very attractive. Sometimes we forget to empty the one we have.

You can’t control what happens when you’re not home.

We run our Roomba daily. Fortunately our dogs are well-trained, and have access to the yard, and so don’t poop in the house. But I know not everyone has a yard.

I predicted the court would make such a ruling in these forums at the outset of the case.

Finding that Apple needs to change some behaviors the judge considered anti-competitive is not the same as being found a monopolist.

The judge specifically found that Apple did not enjoy a monopoly. Epic won only one out of ten charges they brought. Epic lost the nine other charges, including monopoly.

Go read the judge’s decision yourself. I have. If you’re too lazy to read the full ruling, you can read the first paragraph of this article from The Verge, where it says:

Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers concluded that Apple wasn’t unfairly monopolizing the mobile app space with iOS or its in-app purchasing system…

As disappointing as this might be for you, Apple is not a monopolist.

The judge also ruled that Apple can otherwise charge developers fees that are not related to a percentage of its sale price (through payments). Basically whatever it wants, along with being required to open up payments. This is an explicit acknowledgement that Apple owns iOS and can charge for access.

So, in effect, even on this narrow point, Epic lost.

https://www.theverge.com/2021/9/12/22667694/epic-v-apple-trial-fortnite-judge-yvonne-gonzalez-rogers-final-ruling-injunction-breakdown

From the article above – please note the word "regulator":

Apple will let dating app developers offer alternate payment options in the Netherlands in compliance with the Dutch regulator’s ruling,

From the linked Bloomberg article:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-15/apple-will-add-additional-payment-options-for-dutch-dating-apps

The company also said it disagrees with the decision and is appealing it. "Because we do not believe these orders are in our users’ best interests, we have appealed the ACM’s decision to a higher court," Apple said. "We’re concerned these changes could compromise the user experience, and create new threats to user privacy and data security."

So, yeah, the court will decide. You stand corrected.

Seems overly pessimistic.

Markets need to be regulated. They just don’t like it. And I say this as a capitalist.

Socialism can mean different things to different people. The US has many elements of socialism – which is good. It actually needs more socialism, imho, most obviously regarding health insurance in the form of single payer.

But using the word "socialism" as an ad hominem attack is evidence of intellectual laziness. Please attack the argument, not the person.

I guess that will be up to the courts to decide.

Thanks for the information. I have an attorney friend with a background in antitrust. We might talk tomorrow. If I have anything to add, I will.

I hear you about Paxton. The good news is he isn’t the only AG on this case, and his senior staff is likely doing the legal heavy lifting while he’s out talking to the press.

iOS has about a 40% market share in The Netherlands. Not "dominant".

https://www.statista.com/statistics/640039/market-share-mobile-operating-systems-netherlands/

Apple is not a monopolist. Please see Epic v. Apple. The judge ruled it is not a monopoly.

And – especially in the EU, where iOS has a much smaller market share than in the US.

I’d be game for Slutify.

I’m not exactly sure what you mean.

We do have laws, each state has its version of the UCC, except Louisiana, and then there are Federal laws in addition to county and city level codes. There are also Federal, state and county level agencies that issue licenses and enforce regulations (NHTSA, building codes, health department, fire department, etc.) Then there are criminal laws as well, Federal and state.

All of these are "State intervention", as you put it, in free markets.

Is this not clear to you?

That is cool.

One thing I love about government funded science is how we can all feel good about it. On these huge projects, like the Shuttle or the James Webb Space Telescope, we are collectively pushing the boundaries of both science and technology, tens of thousands of people actually contribute, and we all can feel good about it because we have collectively funded it. It crosses political boundaries.

It just has a purity and beauty to it.

Most companies I have worked with seek to differentiate their products and services to create (legal) mini monopolies. No one wants to have cutthroat competition. And, yes, that’s free market capitalism at work.

I myself developed an actual near-monopoly in one region of the country, in one class of consumer cleaning products. That was fun. The company was able to enjoy slightly higher prices, but really not by much. We didn’t want to anger our customers and create an opening for another producer to come in, or to make it profitable to ship in from other areas. So, even with monopolies there are often constraints.

Ultimately, this is why we have regulation. It works. Remember how the colluding to limit salaries ended, and why?

https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-tech-jobs-settlement-20150903-story.html

Does anyone know (with certainty) if this would rise to the level of a criminal complaint?

This does look like collusion and anti-competitive practices. Oopsies.

Go get em, AG’s!

Yes, but the total cost for a year is now about $200. And when you consider that many people buy multiple streamers, you’re now taking about upwards of a $500 per year expense. That is a level where people will start managing that expense more carefully.

It will be interesting to see how the streamers respond to people jumping in and out on subscriptions. They might offer a lower price for a full year or six month commitment or prepayment.