connor11528

great quote at the end:

> Readers who share the assumption of likeness are given the delicious opportunity to nod knowingly. But historical writing should aspire to higher aims and riskier arguments than those that merely flatter the sentiments of anti-Trump partisans who, overwhelmed by the present, find satisfying displeasure in echoes from the past.

the best remedy for abuses of big tech is to break them up, actually creating the conditions for a more free market rather one run oligopolies.

america has a monopoly problem

i know right? this is going to go on forever

not sure what you mean or how it relates to the article?

break. them. up.

my favorite idea from the article: "Markets are a function of law."

that's an under appreciated sentiment by lots of people that think economic markets as natural. in reality they're constructs from our politics. antitrust laws used to be enforced to prevent this type of consolidation of capital. i'm glad antitrust enforcements are coming back to decentralize the American economy

you can upload a csv of linkedin connections to a Clay table then use a data provider like FullEnrich to get emails and other profile info.

Could also use a tool like n8n instead of Clay or build your own system to read the csv and make api calls to enrichment service

ya there's got to be an awakening that this is not the way. i think it's coming

> Asset control and power in America is centered among old people with lots of assets. And they associate protecting the stock market with protecting America.

> The “number go up” rule is not a story of greed or economics, it’s a story of how we make decisions as a society.

well said!

my favorite quote from the article is from Lina Khan:

"we don’t need to protect our monopolies from innovation—we need to protect innovation from our monopolies. We need to choose competition over national champions"

this is an issue with companies being too big

how are you harvesting all this data?

> For example you could almost build a new kind of Job Search Service that matches job descriptions to job candidates based on nothing but a vector similarity between resume and job description. That's probably so obvious it's being done, already.

Literally the next item on my roadmap for employbl dot com lol. we're calling it a "personalized job board" and using PGVector for storing the embeddings. I've also heard good things about Typesense though.

One thing I've found to be important when creating the embeddings is to not do an embedding of the whole job description. Instead use an LLM to make a concise summary of the job listing (location, skills etc.) in a structured format. Then store that store as the embedding. It reduces noise and increases accuracy for vector search.

Very cool! I like that you can send small batch sizes to do small marketing bets. Going to build a campaign to promote my b2c saas in my city

it's banning non competes not non disclosures

> specific political goal to break up large corporations

you mean regulatory job of enforcing the antitrust laws that were passed by multiple Congresses? She's not making this stuff up she's enforcing antitrust laws that haven't been enforced for decades which is part of the reason our society is so unequal and the economy so centralized

> Apple didn’t want to pay to give Lina Kahn time on their platform.

Jon Stewart wanted her on the show, they said no. That's them exercising their censorship power. If Amazon says you can't sell a book on their cite because they don't like you that's them exercising censorship power too.

> If she, or Jon Stewart, were censored, we wouldn’t be seeing their conversation here.

Just because Apple doesn't own other platforms like YouTube and Comedy Central doesn't mean they're unable to exercise censorship.

> there is nothing requiring Apple to provide him with a show if they don’t like his approach

For sure Apple can make editorial decisions but the government's lawyers claim: "Apple’s conduct extends beyond just monopoly profits and even affects the flow of speech. For example, Apple is rapidly expanding its role as a TV and movie producer and has exercised that role to control content"

They didn't just block Lina Khan they blocked discussions about China and AI. As more power is concentrated in fewer hands and fewer media providers that's something to consider when enforcing antitrust laws. In Khan's words:

“I think it just shows one of the dangers of what happens when you concentrate so much power and so much decision-making in a small number of companies.”

> In many ways, Biden, by taking on four multi-trillion dollar firms in a way that Obama could never have imagined, is forcing a reckoning. Because what Biden is doing is actually hopeful, not because it makes us feel good, but because it is a reordering of the political hierarchies who structure our lives in ways that foster alienation. It makes us look at the sparkling liars who tell us pretty fables, like Apple, and decide whether we want to be adults, or whether we want to go on allowing ourselves to be ruled by our “betters.”

To me this gets to the heart of the issue. Many people think that because Apple makes great products we should just let them do whatever they want, even if it's anti-competitive.

:shrug:

So glad they were allowed to buy their competitor Auth0.

The law they’re prosecuting them under is from 1890 and doesn’t mention consumer welfare once. The judiciary has made up and implemented the consumer welfare standard without the approval of Congress. Agree it’s gunna be interesting how the government pursues the case! I haven’t read the full complaint yet but I plan to :)

For real. Hopefully won't be long until there's a similar case against Apple

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/26/justice-department-...

In the "remedies" section of the complaint they ask for "divestiture" which I'm pretty sure means spinning companies off out of Alphabet's hands.

> Order the divestiture of, at minimum, the Google Ad Manager suite, including both Google’s publisher ad server, DFP, and Google’s ad exchange, AdX, along with any additional structural relief as needed to cure any anticompetitive harm;

I’d just use their service and move on. You could build it for fun but it doesn’t sound like a great idea to make a worse version of something already out there that’s not even doing that well. If you think you can do it better and grow the market then go for it

From the article and multiple police investigations it sounds like your software is used by them to run their illicit businesses. Having users register could be one option. If there's one guy and a bunch of teenage girls on a plan that might be a red flag or worth further review. Perhaps your company could look at all the people that were busted and see if there's commonalities with how they use the app. It's my guess that if multiple people were using it for trafficking and were busted there's probably traffickers using your software right now.

Are you going to do anything differently so that your software is not used to facilitate sex trafficking?

Do you think protection under Section 230 is relevant here? Seems like it might be giving the company extra protection

makes sense!

Ya it’s a good point that no one is ever really prepared for large scale war. It’s my hope that through readiness, domestic production and militarization world conflict can be avoided like it was in the Cold War

Ya good point about the military industrial complex. I feel like we need a new term for the way the industry has consolidated. Companies can win by colluding instead of competing.