Hacker News Reader

Comment by ho_schi | Hacker News Reader

How about regulating Big Tech? Which was done with AT&T before Reagan and caused UNIX, C, Open-Source and Open-Documentation.

And encouraging and requiring open-source software development in Europe, founded by non-profit organizations and government. With requirements and control. The base for solution is readily available with Linux and BSD. Our politicians and CEOs only think in short terms. As consumers do :(

We can ban or tax things, like shipping Laptops with proprietary operating-systems. Declare, that the pre-installed operating-system must be open-source with {GPL, MIT, BSD} and fulfill standards. If not? Fine. Ship it without an operating-system.

And teach kids at school about scale of software and vendor lock-in. Every monopoly starts with being lazy and just grasping the first solution...

View on HN

Ah yes, ban and regulate your way to innovation. That's certainly going to work. And of course, you threw in Reagan. You'll certainly get upvotes, but nothing else.

Because it works?

Regulations are for people. And are applied upon companies. They have a probable side effect, very wealthy persons don’t get extremely rich by harming everyone.

If that means I can install Linux on a laptop? Fine. Replace a battery? Fine. I’m not ruined if I got sick? Fine. Wealthy persons don’t need to be afraid that all other people start getting desperate? Fine. Breathing clean air? Fine.

I favor regulation over splitting monopolies. Because a split doesn’t prevent it to happen again. If we split {Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon…} the smaller companies will start the same stuff again.

PS: Sometimes things fire back? Or it seems like it fires back. The Cookie-Directive for example. Sadly companies use malicious compliance as business opportunity. There are now companies with a business model entirely relying on serving cookies for others and storing it centrally. Otherwise we see how big the problem actually is because they need to show what they do…

If it worked Europe wouldn't be behind in tech and tech investment.

Behind in the opinion of some chronically online tech power user.

Your high tech is behind the tech of 10 generations from now. Just as meaningless a comparison.

It’s unfortunate so many so poorly understand the ramifications of physics.

Ah, one of billions. Belief this opinion of yours is relevant in any way is cute in “the child is clearly an idiot” kind of way.

I keep hearing this but what does it mean to be 'behind'? Behind what? What actual innovation are we seeing from Silicon Valley that is improving life for humans? The EU has its faults but at least it's willing to take on big corporations. What does Google 'create' these days - other than vast swathes of ad data to sell people? How is AirBnB even a tech company or Uber? There's too much rent-seeking, gamifying, and destructive real world effects of lack of regulation that even some can help people. We've been through this before with industrialization in the modern world - some benefits, many of which go to a small percentage of people; many detriments, which harm all (such as pollution).

Also, 'tech investment' is such BS these days. Infinite venture capital (or at least in ZIRP days) that has led to little real 'innovation', just more BS gamified adtech. And now the US is ripping down any realistic science R&D. It's Europe's moment to take the reins or lose the opportunity. You don't Softbank or some blood-stained oil money from UAE to do that.

No debating any of that, it does not change the facts: Way more investor money is going into tech, however dubious, in the US.

Maybe that will change in the next few years, but it didn't happen for NYC or Texas either.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com