It is good to see that you have not veered from what I view as an interesting perspective, one that fits into a neat stereotype. The first element of this stereotype: gummint bad!
Are you prepared for the federal government to nationalize large chunks of virtually every large tech company in the nation, and have the government run and pay for that infrastructure?
No, and I never said as much. Those are words you incorrectly ascribed to me, probably to Straw Man the hell out of government action of all sorts. There are so many different types of arrangements in the society/business dance that avoid your blunt force trauma imposition of "nationalizising", ones that work very well indeed in respecting the interests of more than a few parties.
Next stereotype: bizness gud!
…apparently you believe you know the proper percentage better than the operator of the store and the hardware.
All I know from this current kerfuffle is that some operators have pleaded for decreased toll charges on a platform, and the platform has pretty much told them to pound sand up their ass. When the first party responded with a ballsy move, they got shut out completely. That's it.
Again, as I stated above, I have no dog in this fight. Epic can indeed fuck themselves for all I care. Apple, too.
What we have here seems to be monopolistic behavior. Seriously, if Apple can just shut out a player from its platform——with or without good reason for doing so——monopoly.
You also note Epic's profits as reason they should be compliant with monopoly behavior, without noting Apple's own obscene profits, often obscured by legal shifting and other shenanigans.
On one detail, yes, we agree: this is a new-ish market, not one ready for municipalization. That doesn't mean Apple might well avoid such societal impositions by not acting just like the trusts that got busted after the Gilded Age.
no subject
Are you prepared for the federal government to nationalize large chunks of virtually every large tech company in the nation, and have the government run and pay for that infrastructure?
No, and I never said as much. Those are words you incorrectly ascribed to me, probably to Straw Man the hell out of government action of all sorts. There are so many different types of arrangements in the society/business dance that avoid your blunt force trauma imposition of "nationalizising", ones that work very well indeed in respecting the interests of more than a few parties.
Next stereotype: bizness gud!
…apparently you believe you know the proper percentage better than the operator of the store and the hardware.
All I know from this current kerfuffle is that some operators have pleaded for decreased toll charges on a platform, and the platform has pretty much told them to pound sand up their ass. When the first party responded with a ballsy move, they got shut out completely. That's it.
Again, as I stated above, I have no dog in this fight. Epic can indeed fuck themselves for all I care. Apple, too.
What we have here seems to be monopolistic behavior. Seriously, if Apple can just shut out a player from its platform——with or without good reason for doing so——monopoly.
You also note Epic's profits as reason they should be compliant with monopoly behavior, without noting Apple's own obscene profits, often obscured by legal shifting and other shenanigans.
On one detail, yes, we agree: this is a new-ish market, not one ready for municipalization. That doesn't mean Apple might well avoid such societal impositions by not acting just like the trusts that got busted after the Gilded Age.