• 0 Posts
  • 26 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 12th, 2023

help-circle
  • AbsolutelyNotABot@lemm.eetoEurope@feddit.orgWill Europe ease up on big tech?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    3 months ago

    whining about only apply to them, not small startups

    No, to the point blue sky, not exactly big tech, is struggling to comply, after being called out.

    They said they will, it’s not even bad faith.

    Contrary to common beliefs, regulations strongly favour big companies, because they have the resources to keep up with burocracy, while gatekeeping smaller companies

    The problem isn’t VC money either, because American and global funds invest in European companies too, there aren’t just as many eligible ones.

    Most successful start up in Europe still decide to get listen on american exchanges (see the recent klarna case) This is purely because of favorable environment lol

    Fuck them, if they have to stay, follow our laws

    I mean, I really don’t care, but that’s exactly how european economy remained, keep doing the same thing expecting a different outcome doesn’t seem smart

    And no, Volkswagen is the 10th company in the world by revenues, it’s not dumping, European manufacturers simply can’t keep the pace. The most sold EV in Europe right now is Tesla lol


  • AbsolutelyNotABot@lemm.eetoEurope@feddit.orgWill Europe ease up on big tech?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    The assumption is excessive regulation is one of the reason we don’t have a domestic tech industry

    While I don’t think it’s necessary the main factor, for sure it’s partially true

    If Apple, Google, Microsoft and other big tech are cautious and struggling to bring features in Europe while being compliance, I can’t imagine how an european start up could trive as their starting market here

    You can’t really deregulate domestic companies only





  • if an admin of an instance marks a post as potentially illegal, it gets replicated to other instances automatically and gets in queu for deletion.

    This opens at some terrible abuse, just open a malevolent instant and start flagging all the content you don’t like as illegal

    At the same time I hate to see the promised federated network revert to what commercial platforms have become, karma and account age requirement, phone and identity verification , forced 2fa and what not.

    While I share this very same feeling, I also recognize there are reasons why commercial platforms have done what they’ve done, I don’t think they’re inherently evil, they just had to face the very same problems we have







  • don’t try to tell me that Disney is going to go out of business because I pirated their latest movie

    The problem is the antisocial behavior and externalities. Piracy has a negative externality on society, it lets you consume a product you didn’t contribute to production whatsoever. If it becomes commonplace then yes, Disney will go bankrupt, but will every producer, small or big or anything in between.

    Rules shouldn’t be arbitrary. People work at Disney too, and you’ll have less artist, animator and stuff, all paid less, it the market shrinks because of piracy


  • People who will pay as long as they get their money’s worth, who may also be open to supporting the creator directly

    The point is, isn’t the producer right to make the price? You can always not consume what they produce. This category is the most obnoxious; would you ever go to a restaurant and expect to decide the prices?

    It’s the very same argument for producers that willingly release their contently freely and let you support them, eventually. It’s their choice.

    Of the three you quoted preservation is the only one I find acceptable. If the producer no longer care to distribute their product, then they probably don’t care to what it happens to it either.

    I think It is illegal and immoral to sell consumers a license to use a product, under the guise of them owning it

    For me the main difference is that nobody is forcing you to accept the transaction. I could accept this kind of argument for drugs for example, where you either take it or die/have serious repercussions. But pirating a movie you would have very much lived without just because is easy to do so it’s particularly problematic.

    they are going to get paid regardless of whether you as an individual decide to purchase or pass on a product

    Except they aren’t. Or at least, of course they’re payed the same, at the moment. But in our economy prices are signals. If a market will appear smaller then it is because of piracy then after some timesfewer developers will be hired, and each of them will be payed less because you’re “falsifying” the signals. Or even worst, the producers will start to use alternative form of monetization. That’s one of the reason the modern web is based off ads or free-to-play games with microtransanctions are so damn common.

    IMO the people in the first camp probably aren’t interested in money if they have chosen not to purchase their media to begin with

    The people in the first category should also think about the allocation problem. Those products which they like to consume but not pay for, still had a cost of production. The problem is they want ti consume, without supporting production, and that’s not gonna work for a society.


  • Probably might be worth a pirate

    But here comes a problem of fairness.

    You not only want to play the game, you also want to decide how much is worthed for the producer. If the price is too high, don’t play it. Imagine going to a restaurant and saying “sure, cook for me, I’ll later pay you if and how much I think it will worthed”

    Not only this but:

    Or I might not, since Ubisoft are a bunch of utter cunts.

    Because you acknowledge the damaging nature of piracy, not only that, you also decide that rules are applied arbitrarily, which is a terrible thing to base your system on.