this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
28 points (88.9% liked)

Technology

58159 readers
3407 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Is it more anti competitive than McDonald's only selling McDonald's burgers or preventing you from bringing Taco Bell tacos in from outside?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Is it more anti competitive than McDonald's only selling McDonald's burgers

Yeah, it's more like the next time you go to Wendy's, McDonald's will follow you and try to lock the doors before you go in.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

No, not really. Google can't do anything about my taking my Firefox browser and watching videos from somewhere else. There are countless other video streaming services.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There are countless other video streaming services.

There are government websites - including my state's dmv - that exclusively use youtube. You're being disingenuous when you're saying you can just use another streaming service (and I don't believe you don't know it).

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The efficient solution to that problem is governments using a different platform that's actually neutral. The government has full control over where they host their videos. Using that as a reason to TRY (a likely long and drawn out process) to force Google to change its policies company-wide is silly.

I'm not being disingenuous. I watch videos on a bunch of platforms. It's easy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

The efficient solution to that problem is governments using a different platform that's actually neutral.

First time I've heard public services called efficient, but ok.

I'm not being disingenuous. I watch videos on a bunch of platforms. It's easy.

We're not talking about you here. You're purposely ignoring the problem, and therefore being disingenuous.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Yes except everyone knows YouTube has a massive, massive market advantage in that space. And the channel you want to watch isn't on the others. And you know this too.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

🙄 No it would be like Ford owning gas stations and pumping faster for Ford vehicles than Chevy.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

That's less restrictive than what I said. McDonald's won't let you bring tacos in at all, doesn't just make you wait at the door for 2 minutes, etc.

Edit: and to anyone quibbling with my McDonald's example saying you can in fact bring tacos in, that was just an illustration. I can find plenty of examples of one establishment not letting people bring food in from somewhere else.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

I don't feel your analogy quite captures what is going on here because both McDonald's and Taco Bell are in the same business. Maybe if you explain it more.

Google owns a major web destination, YouTube, essentially a line of business in its own right, in addition to Chrome, also its own distinct product. Firefox competes with Chrome but Google is allegedly using market dominance with YouTube to make it harder for Firefox to compete.

If a company owns two products A and B and if A is used to access B, company cannot hinder competitors to A via fuckery in B.

This is the kind of thing that MS got in trouble for -- using Windows to tip the scales in favor of Internet Explorer by tightly integrating it into the OS.

McDonald's prohibiting people from using their restaurant, which is not itself a separate product with a separate market. Nobody is clamoring to go to McDonald's restaurant spaces to sit and eat. It's just part of the restaurant offering. So there is no leverage like there is with YouTube being used against a competitor for a totally different product. And besides, Taco Bell can do the same as McDonald's. They're on equal footing.

If in your analogy there were some other product that McDonald's owned that could penalize you for going to Taco Bell your analogy would work.

  • Google -- Ford
  • Mozilla -- Chevy
  • Firefox -- Chevy car
  • Chrome -- Ford Car
  • YouTube -- Ford gas station
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Doesn't Tesla do the equivalent of that with charging stations?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Maybe. But Tesla doesn't own over 50% of the charging station market share.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

True... I think even if they don't, it's still potentially anti-competitive.

(Gawd, Imagine how life would be with gas station incompatibility with your car. Holy shit that would suck).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago
  1. Yes. Yes, it is!

  2. McDonald's doesn't actually give a shit if you bring in food from other places.