• User-uploading of files is now fully enabled!! Check out our full announcement for details.

    All accounts with 0 posts on them have been purged. If you are coming back to us after a long time and you find you can't log in, then that would probably be why.

FTC Reinstates Net Neutrality, Bans Non-Compete Clauses

Arnox

Master
Staff member
Founder
Messages
5,441


Lina Khan's probably the main person to thank for this, but I'm sure many at the FTC are happy to actually be able to do their jobs now. Now I'm curious as to how the monopoly case against Apple is going to go. Hopefully Apple will be torn a new one.
 

CharlieTheStooge

Outlander
Messages
17
Specialization
Technophiliacs & Technophiles
Certainly an encouraging development. Although even if non-competes are formally banned I wonder if companies are still going to throw the might of lawyers around using excuses of trade-secrets or NDA being a conflict of interest to work for a competitor in the same field making such a ban only in name.
 

Phiwise_

Adherent
Messages
36
Specialization
Technophiliacs & Technophiles
>Now I'm curious as to how the monopoly case against Apple is going to go. Hopefully Apple will be torn a new one.

Anyone who supports this nonsense needs to be airlifted to Europe, where there are no major hardware manufacturers, for at least a decade. Put their money where their mouth is. The jackals who work at the FTC cannot be physically removed from their positions soon enough.
 

Arnox

Master
Staff member
Founder
Messages
5,441
>Now I'm curious as to how the monopoly case against Apple is going to go. Hopefully Apple will be torn a new one.

Anyone who supports this nonsense needs to be airlifted to Europe, where there are no major hardware manufacturers, for at least a decade. Put their money where their mouth is. The jackals who work at the FTC cannot be physically removed from their positions soon enough.
Wait, you don't support the lawsuit against Apple?
 

Phiwise_

Adherent
Messages
36
Specialization
Technophiliacs & Technophiles
Wait, you don't support the lawsuit against Apple?
Of course not. Why would I support bad law, just because I dislike the target this time? The harm of serving as precedent against morally superior future targets vastly outweighs the emotional satisfaction of arbitrary punishment against an enemy in the moment.
 

Arnox

Master
Staff member
Founder
Messages
5,441
Of course not. Why would I support bad law, just because I dislike the target this time? The harm of serving as precedent against morally superior future targets vastly outweighs the emotional satisfaction of arbitrary punishment against an enemy in the moment.
Alright. What exactly do you think is wrong with the lawsuit?
 

Phiwise_

Adherent
Messages
36
Specialization
Technophiliacs & Technophiles
Alright. What exactly do you think is wrong with the lawsuit?
It'd probably be faster to list the things that aren't wrong with it. TLDR: It's Apple's systems and services. They can make them however they want, and I can respond by buying however many of them I want. Trying to keep them alive by changing their services to however you think will work best instead of however they think they want to use up their capital is the antithesis of competition. It's just like with the antitrust discussions around the ActiBlizz/Microsoft merger. Everyone agrees both of these companies are a dying dumpster fire, yet many howl like chimps if you suggest merging the fires so they burn down faster. No, for some reason the men with guns must step in to ensure we do things the long, slow, and painful way, because that's what the health of society really needs.

Remember, the only reason any of this FTC absurdity has even a semblance of weight today is because almost three whole decades ago a boomer was too dumb to backup his bookmarks while uninstalling his web browser and the judge he brought the case to saw a career opportunity. Be smarter than the boomers. Reject anticapitalist nonsense out of hand.
 

Arnox

Master
Staff member
Founder
Messages
5,441
It'd probably be faster to list the things that aren't wrong with it. TLDR: It's Apple's systems and services. They can make them however they want, and I can respond by buying however many of them I want. Trying to keep them alive by changing their services to however you think will work best instead of however they think they want to use up their capital is the antithesis of competition. It's just like with the antitrust discussions around the ActiBlizz/Microsoft merger. Everyone agrees both of these companies are a dying dumpster fire, yet many howl like chimps if you suggest merging the fires so they burn down faster. No, for some reason the men with guns must step in to ensure we do things the long, slow, and painful way, because that's what the health of society really needs.

Remember, the only reason any of this FTC absurdity has even a semblance of weight today is because almost three whole decades ago a boomer was too dumb to backup his bookmarks while uninstalling his web browser and the judge he brought the case to saw a career opportunity. Be smarter than the boomers. Reject anticapitalist nonsense out of hand.
As someone who actually does support capitalism (to an extent), I don't think (SMART) regulation of megacorps like Apple is inherently a bad thing. But putting that aside, would you instead support just splitting Apple up into a bunch of smaller corps?
 

Phiwise_

Adherent
Messages
36
Specialization
Technophiliacs & Technophiles
As someone who actually does support capitalism (to an extent)
Lol.

I don't think (SMART) regulation of megacorps like Apple is inherently a bad thing. But putting that aside, would you instead support just splitting Apple up into a bunch of smaller corps?
"I support your freedom of speech, I just think your forum needs to be broken up because reasons that totally aren't just suppressing your speech!"
Lmao, even.
 

Arnox

Master
Staff member
Founder
Messages
5,441
Lol.



"I support your freedom of speech, I just think your forum needs to be broken up because reasons that totally aren't just suppressing your speech!"
Lmao, even.
This is not a freedom of speech issue. This is a corporate actions issue that actively harms competition and consumer options.
 

Vendor-Lazarus

Arch Disciple
Sanctuary legend
Messages
973
Any corporation that is anti-competetive is not capitalist. If capitalism is supposed to be about competition. Funny how it always leads to corporate fascism.

The simile to freedom of speech would be actively supporting someone trying to take away your freedom of speech..
 

Phiwise_

Adherent
Messages
36
Specialization
Technophiliacs & Technophiles
This is not a freedom of speech issue. This is a corporate actions issue that actively harms competition and consumer options.
When I wrote this, I thought it was pretty clear I did not literally think the FTC imposing controlling direction of Apple Computer's business property was a free speech issue. Please re-read my comment with the added information that I was employing a metaphor and reply again.
 

Arnox

Master
Staff member
Founder
Messages
5,441
When I wrote this, I thought it was pretty clear I did not literally think the FTC imposing controlling direction of Apple Computer's business property was a free speech issue. Please re-read my comment with the added information that I was employing a metaphor and reply again.
Fine then.

It's Apple's systems and services. They can make them however they want, and I can respond by buying however many of them I want.
Normally, yes, but if a corporation gets too large, then special circumstances start to apply. I'm going to use a bit of an extreme example to illustrate this. Let's say (and not saying this is reality obviously) that Apple has over 80% of ALL phone market share. And you get an Android. Well, it could very well be that when you try to text your friends, family, or co-workers, you can't, because they all have an iPhone, they all use iMessage, and Apple has made it to where iMessage won't work with Android messaging services. So yeah, in that scenario, you had the OPTION of buying an Android, sure. But it doesn't matter, because Apple has made it to where other market options, even if they are available, are not practically that viable.
 

Gauche

Arch Disciple
Messages
690
Empty article

https://steamyouoweus.co.uk/the-claim/

This means that it is not possible to list a game on another platform as well as Steam, unless the price on Steam is the same or lower. This applies to games and add on content on all other distribution stores (including online and physical stores) not just those distributed by Steam Keys.
Bullshit


 

Houseman

Zealot
Sanctuary legend
Messages
1,112
I think a steam key reseller is different than, say, a publisher selling their own game on their own website with a lower price than the same game on Steam.

I could try to sell you a key that I got as part of a Humble Bundle in exchange for money, for example.
 

Signa

Libertarian Contrarian
Sanctuary legend
Messages
789
Steam only bans lower prices on other sites if they are going to use Steam services. Basically, it's there to protect themselves from obvious abuse cases, where you as a developer, get a bunch of FREE Steam keys to sell on your site and then encourage sales on that site by offering a lower price. If you did that, then all those purchasers would then be taking Valve's bandwidth to download the games on Steam's service, and they didn't get a dime for hosting that transaction.

If you are, say, Wube selling Factorio, you are allowed you sell the installer.exe from your website lower than the price on the Steam platform.
 
Top