I suspect an actionable version of this concept will get into that. It may indeed still be a terrible idea. As we’re still at the “is there a real problem and might we imagine a policy framework to address” stage of the debate, I think it’s more constructive to focus on that.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @stevesi @Carnage4Life and
Call me nutty, but blog posts by presidential candidates trying to raise their profile should be be construed as specific justice department actions. In the words of a wise man, you’re taking this literally not seriously. We’ve learned how that plays out…
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
What was your lived experience at Microsoft during the Msft/USA case like? Do you buy
@superwuster’s Art that it spooked the co enough culturally/institutionally that it didn’t pull as many anti-competitive moves that would’ve prevented other browsers/search engines from emerging4 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @stevesi and
I have never seen an explanation of why the MSFT antitrust caused Microsoft or indeed Nokia to miss smartphones.
6 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @benedictevans @kimmaicutler and
Microsoft didn't miss smartphones; neither did Nokia, or Palm. I was there before 2007. Microsoft and Nokia missed capacitive touchscreens and the resulting interface changes because they were so invested in software that worked on previous systems.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @saschasegan @benedictevans and
Microsoft, Nokia, Palm, BlackBerry all hit the same wall of being unable to cast off old interfaces and compatibility when radically new hardware capabilities developed. Nothing to do with antitrust.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @saschasegan @kimmaicutler and
Thai is the point exactly. The reasons Microsoft no longer dominates tech have zero to do with anti-trust. This is not an argument against anti-trust, but it is an argument against the presumption anti-trust is the only solution.
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @benedictevans @saschasegan and
For something this big, we need a vigorous debate where good intentions are set aside and potential unintended consequences are seriously evaluated. How’s GDPR actually performing? Let’s listen carefully to analysts who predicted this.https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/jonmarkman/2018/05/22/gdpr-is-great-news-for-google-and-facebook-really/amp/ …
1 reply 2 retweets 5 likes
Agreed, but not having the debate at all in the first place means we just continue w/ the Bork/Chicago status quo since the late 1970s.
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler @benedictevans and
FTC was created 105 years ago to promote consumer protection and prevent anticompetitive business practices like coercive monopolies. In retrospect, they failed to see how Instagram/Doubleclick would play out. Rather than rewrite, let’s build on what we have.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.