Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:47 am
What is the product you’re using? Who’s paying for it?guy smiley wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:45 amYou’re using Google right now and every time you’re on the net.
Planet Rugby Forum
The definitive rugby union forum. Talk to fans from around the world about your favourite team
https://forum.planetrugby.com/
The Australian Politics Thread
Page 625 of 734
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:49 am
This is counterintuitive and I’ve been deep into this for a few years. What I should do is stop prancing like a know-all and give you stuff from experts.
But I’ve done that and no one except GS read it. So get farked! I guess I can continue to hold court like I’m a professor talking to kiddies.
But I’ve done that and no one except GS read it. So get farked! I guess I can continue to hold court like I’m a professor talking to kiddies.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:49 am
What browser are you using?guy smiley wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:49 amIrrelevant. I don't want Google to control it.towny wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:47 amWhat is the product you’re using? Who’s paying for it?guy smiley wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:45 amYou’re using Google right now and every time you’re on the net.
Whatever it is.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:55 am
https://www.theverge.com/2020/8/15/2137 ... ne-browserguy smiley wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:52 amtowny wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:49 am This is counterintuitive and I’ve been deep into this for a few years. What I should do is stop prancing like a know-all and give you stuff from experts.
But I’ve done that and no one except GS read it. So get farked! I guess I can continue to hold court like I’m a professor talking to kiddies.
Firefox.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:02 am
If you do t want to believe me, how about the US Congress investigation that found Google and other tech companies wield monopolistic powers?
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/06/tech/con ... index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/06/tech/con ... index.html
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:02 am
Oh wow. You’ve thought of everything.guy smiley wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:57 amYou can set your own defaultstowny wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:55 amhttps://www.theverge.com/2020/8/15/2137 ... ne-browserguy smiley wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:52 amtowny wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 9:49 am This is counterintuitive and I’ve been deep into this for a few years. What I should do is stop prancing like a know-all and give you stuff from experts.
But I’ve done that and no one except GS read it. So get farked! I guess I can continue to hold court like I’m a professor talking to kiddies.
Firefox.
Well, if you insist on having irrelevant ads I reckon you’d do well to include this to your elaborate web toolbox.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... e-google1/
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:09 am
People Towny knows more about monopolies than:
The authors of investopedia (who are Wall Street fund managers and university professors)
University Professors writing text books
Jeffrey Sachs
US Congress
Academics
Fortune 500 CEOs
The authors of investopedia (who are Wall Street fund managers and university professors)
University Professors writing text books
Jeffrey Sachs
US Congress
Academics
Fortune 500 CEOs
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:10 am
I know heaps about that as I’ve been following it closely.Farva wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:02 am If you do t want to believe me, how about the US Congress investigation that found Google and other tech companies wield monopolistic powers?
https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/06/tech/con ... index.html
1. They’re politicians and clueless
2. They have certainly a strong case in the anti-trust goings on in the app stores
3. Their ‘non-app store’ case against Facebook lasted 20 minutes when the judge told them fcuk off and come back with a statement, let alone evidence, for something that constituted anti-trust behaviour.
4. No government has landed a punch when trying to get Google Trust on anti-trust. They’ve tried in many countries and it gets thrown out at the outset because Google and Facebook meet none of the definitions of monopoly, let alone illegal antitrust behaviour.
5. There have been a couple of times when Google did some dodgy stuff with pricing, which was called out, but this shouldn’t be used as a smoking gun. If it was, they’d be in the dock. But they aren’t.
Google does not control supply. As you said, this is high school economics. But keep googling stuff and try and avoid this fact.
Google does not control the supply of anything.
It’s about the App Store and notjitnt
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:11 am
So your argument is to lump authorities in a bundle and make a binary statement? I can do that too or I can keep offering factual, provable evidence.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:12 am
You have been on PR how long? Finally good to see you have worked out how things work on here.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:19 am
The FTC kicked off this case after the US Congressional Report. It didn’t last until lunch time.
The FTC used the argument, they’re dominant so they are a monopoly and that’s bad. The judge didn’t even hear the case. “GTFO with that piss-weak shite”.
They’ll come back and get smashed again and again because Facebook controls demand and not supply.
The FTC had all the evidence uncovered by US Congress. So yeah, I know more about this then they do.
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap ... 1.73.0.pdfAlthough the Court does not agree with all of Facebook’s contentions here, it ultimately concurs that the agency’s Complaint is legally insufficient and must therefore be dismissed. The FTC has failed to plead enough facts to plausibly establish a necessary element of all of its Section 2 claims — namely, that Facebook has monopoly power in the market for Personal Social Networking (PSN) Services. The Complaint contains nothing on that score save the naked allegation that the company has had and still has a “dominant share of th[at] market (in excess of 60%).” Such an unsupported assertion might (barely) suffice in a Section 2 case involving a more traditional goods market, in which the Court could reasonably infer that market share was measured by revenue, units sold, or some other typical metric. But this case involves no ordinary or intuitive market. Rather, PSN services are free to use, and the exact metes and bounds of what even constitutes a PSN service — i.e., which features of a company’s mobile app or website are included in that definition and which are excluded — are hardly crystal clear. In this unusual context, the FTC’s inability to offer any indication of the metric(s) or method(s) it used to calculate Facebook’s market share renders its vague “60%-plus” assertion too speculative and conclusory to go forward. Because this defect could conceivably be overcome by re-pleading, however, the Court will dismiss only the Complaint, not the case, and will do so without prejudice to allow Plaintiff to file an amended Complaint.
The FTC used the argument, they’re dominant so they are a monopoly and that’s bad. The judge didn’t even hear the case. “GTFO with that piss-weak shite”.
They’ll come back and get smashed again and again because Facebook controls demand and not supply.
The FTC had all the evidence uncovered by US Congress. So yeah, I know more about this then they do.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:19 am
I provided dictionary definitions and textbook definitions of how google is a monopoly. You don’t agree. There is nothing more I can post to convince you.
You are ignoring evidence. Bimbtowny…
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:21 am
No you didn’t. You provided incorrect definitions. Google and Facebook don’t control supply. You thought you had a point but it was irrelevant.Farva wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:19 amI provided dictionary definitions and textbook definitions of how google is a monopoly. You don’t agree. There is nothing more I can post to convince you.
You are ignoring evidence. Bimbtowny…
You don’t get this and I’m wondering what makes it so difficult for a University educated man to understand.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:28 am
Also, evidence of group-think isn’t evidence. If you don’t understand a topic, and you must realise you don’t, why would you be so passionate that you’re correct?
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:37 am
Normally I make these arguments not to convince the person I’m arguing with but rather the people who are reading it.towny wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:21 amNo you didn’t. You provided incorrect definitions. Google and Facebook don’t control supply. You thought you had a point but it was irrelevant.Farva wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:19 amI provided dictionary definitions and textbook definitions of how google is a monopoly. You don’t agree. There is nothing more I can post to convince you.
You are ignoring evidence. Bimbtowny…
You don’t get this and I’m wondering what makes it so difficult for a University educated man to understand.
I have just realised that individual is Guy Smiley.
I’m now seriously reassessing my life choices
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:40 am
I understand the topic.
I feel I understand this topic better than you from this conversation.
I understand your point. Google doesn’t supply searches because searchers are not the customer.
I think it’s irrelevant to this discussion.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:42 am
What supply is Google controlling and who is harmed by this?
These are the only questions that matter.
The answers are:
- nothing. Supply on the internet is infinite
- no one. All Google users benefit from their overwhelming dominance.
If you can disprove any of this I’ll send you a good bottle of CndP.
These are the only questions that matter.
The answers are:
- nothing. Supply on the internet is infinite
- no one. All Google users benefit from their overwhelming dominance.
If you can disprove any of this I’ll send you a good bottle of CndP.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:45 am
If you can’t argue over obscure issues on a rugby forum then I don’t want to be on this planet any moreguy smiley wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:39 am Hey, don't blame me for your poor choices.
I'm not reading this shit.
We've had enough of it surely? We could go back to what the thread's actually about.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:47 am
Supply is people using the search engine. They control 90% of that. They supply consumers to advertisers.towny wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:42 am What supply is Google controlling and who is harmed by this?
These are the only questions that matter.
The answers are:
- nothing. Supply on the internet is infinite
- no one. All Google users benefit from their overwhelming dominance.
If you can disprove any of this I’ll send you a good bottle of CndP.
People who are impacted are those that need to advertise on google (Googles customers) because google is a price setter
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:53 am
If ‘supply’ is rhe definition of monopoly and Google doesn’t control it……
Mate, it is 100% relevant! You posted evidence that was completely irrelevant but you insist it isn’t. It’s in black and white.
If you know this subject, share with me the info you’ve read that’s given you such a great understanding, because it conflicts with the stuff I’ve read. I have posted blog articles from renowned experts and court judgements - what have you got?
Group-think is all you’ve offered. I’ll send you 2 bottles of wine if you can prove me wrong. 5 bottles?
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:55 am
Jesus Christ.Farva wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:47 amSupply is people using the search engine. They control 90% of that. They supply consumers to advertisers.towny wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:42 am What supply is Google controlling and who is harmed by this?
These are the only questions that matter.
The answers are:
- nothing. Supply on the internet is infinite
- no one. All Google users benefit from their overwhelming dominance.
If you can disprove any of this I’ll send you a good bottle of CndP.
People who are impacted are those that need to advertise on google (Googles customers) because google is a price setter
So you’re saying that supply and demand are the same thing? How does Google control this supply of people? ‘Control’ is important - how do they do it? Are they locked in? Do they not have a choice?
Furthermore, you’re saying that advertisers don’t want all the people they targeted in one place - they’d prefer to pay multiple platforms the privilege of advertising?
Is that the pointe? Really?
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:06 am
Do you follow this. Google sells access to people. That is their product. They supply consumers of the advertisers products who use the search function. They have nearly 90% of that. They have that market share by offering a superior product. They aren’t doing anything illegal there, but it’s still a monopoly.towny wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:55 amJesus Christ.Farva wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:47 amSupply is people using the search engine. They control 90% of that. They supply consumers to advertisers.towny wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 10:42 am What supply is Google controlling and who is harmed by this?
These are the only questions that matter.
The answers are:
- nothing. Supply on the internet is infinite
- no one. All Google users benefit from their overwhelming dominance.
If you can disprove any of this I’ll send you a good bottle of CndP.
People who are impacted are those that need to advertise on google (Googles customers) because google is a price setter
So you’re saying that supply and demand are the same thing? How does Google control this supply of people? ‘Control’ is important - how do they do it? Are they locked in? Do they not have a choice?
Furthermore, you’re saying that advertisers don’t want all the people they targeted in one place - they’d prefer to pay multiple platforms the privilege of advertising?
Is that the pointe? Really?
The issue comes about in that they have sufficient market share to be price setters. As an advertiser if you want your product to be identified by people using a search engine, which is how 99% of us find things today, then you need to deal with google.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:20 am
I think I get it now.
Suncorp Stadium controls the supply of Wallaby fans in Qld and this harms the Wallabies because they aren’t able to play at other stadiums and make less money.
When you look at it, there are thousand of similar antitrust violators that control the supply of people. Almost everywhere you look.
These companies sinned by being so much better than their competitors that people chose to use them. We can’t have that! It’s bad for the…. Well, it’s bad for someone, right?
If only the world’s courts would crack down on this? I wonder why they won’t?
There is nothing illegal about being a monopoly, but I won’t even get into that hypothetical.
If you wish, I can give you material that will help you understand this topic. In 5 minutes you’ll be as learned as me, but it will involve a realisation that you’ve been speaking ignorant poop.
Suncorp Stadium controls the supply of Wallaby fans in Qld and this harms the Wallabies because they aren’t able to play at other stadiums and make less money.
When you look at it, there are thousand of similar antitrust violators that control the supply of people. Almost everywhere you look.
These companies sinned by being so much better than their competitors that people chose to use them. We can’t have that! It’s bad for the…. Well, it’s bad for someone, right?
If only the world’s courts would crack down on this? I wonder why they won’t?
There is nothing illegal about being a monopoly, but I won’t even get into that hypothetical.
If you wish, I can give you material that will help you understand this topic. In 5 minutes you’ll be as learned as me, but it will involve a realisation that you’ve been speaking ignorant poop.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:29 am
This is a very good article that is specifically relevant by a dude who’s generally considered the best on the planet with this stuff - it even describes Google as a monopoly 
https://stratechery.com/2019/regulating ... o-out/Yeah
Follow this guy if you want to understand more than what News Corp wants you to know.
Edit: paywall. Wait - I’ll post it later.
https://stratechery.com/2019/regulating ... o-out/Yeah
Follow this guy if you want to understand more than what News Corp wants you to know.
Edit: paywall. Wait - I’ll post it later.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:47 am
So erm, have we worked out if Google is a monopoly or not then?
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:50 am
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:53 am
Bing? The Microsoft search engine?Ali's Choice wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:50 amOn the first day of every week all the staff and students at my school only use Bing. We call it 'Stick it to the Man Monday'.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:03 pm
It's contained in something called a book and covers the subject in many pages rather than 20 words or less.towny wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 8:24 amCan you please give me a link to such text?Brumbie_Steve wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 12:27 amIt is almost the exact definition of any text or subject I have studied that covers the subject. Any serious businessman, regulator or academic would use the same definition.towny wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 1:19 pmIt’s not in any way the definition of monopoly anywhere I’ve seen it written.Farva wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 12:40 pm From the Investopedia definition I gave above.
Google has nearly 90% market share. That is near total control of the market. It’s the definition of a monopoly.What Is a Monopoly?
A monopoly refers to when a company and its product offerings dominate a sector or industry. The term monopoly is often used to describe an entity that has total or near-total control of a market
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2021 12:23 am
Here is a link to some texts anyway: https://www.amazon.com/Economics-Textbo ... s+Textbook
I like the irony of using Amazon for this.
I like the irony of using Amazon for this.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2021 1:24 am
Clogs wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:53 amBing? The Microsoft search engine?Ali's Choice wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:50 amOn the first day of every week all the staff and students at my school only use Bing. We call it 'Stick it to the Man Monday'.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2021 2:10 am
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2021 3:59 am
From the following description of a business model can you tell what business it is.
Provide eyeballs to advertisers who pay them for the service. It is the intention of the service provider to make the aggregated cost of providing the eyeballs to be less than the total price paid by all of the advertisers over time.
Provide eyeballs to advertisers who pay them for the service. It is the intention of the service provider to make the aggregated cost of providing the eyeballs to be less than the total price paid by all of the advertisers over time.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:24 am
Did anyone read this?towny wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:29 am This is a very good article that is specifically relevant by a dude who’s generally considered the best on the planet with this stuff - it even describes Google as a monopoly
https://stratechery.com/2019/regulating ... o-out/Yeah
Follow this guy if you want to understand more than what News Corp wants you to know.
Edit: paywall. Wait - I’ll post it later.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:28 am
University of Life
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:31 am
On Facebook no less
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:40 am
Facebook is for old people. Well, older than me anyway.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:00 am
I can tell you that the business model you’ve described is not what Google does.Brumbie_Steve wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 3:59 am From the following description of a business model can you tell what business it is.
Provide eyeballs to advertisers who pay them for the service. It is the intention of the service provider to make the aggregated cost of providing the eyeballs to be less than the total price paid by all of the advertisers over time.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2021 11:13 am
towny wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 9:00 amI can tell you that the business model you’ve described is not what Google does.Brumbie_Steve wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 3:59 am From the following description of a business model can you tell what business it is.
Provide eyeballs to advertisers who pay them for the service. It is the intention of the service provider to make the aggregated cost of providing the eyeballs to be less than the total price paid by all of the advertisers over time.
It matters not what they do, it is how they monetize their activities. At least in part any way. The point is that at the core the basic objectives and motivations are the same.
Universal business model.
Do some activity that results in other entities giving you money. Ensure that cost of performing activity does not exceed the income derived from performing the activity.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2021 11:20 am
Edit: paywall. Wait - I’ll post it later.towny wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:24 amDid anyone read this?towny wrote: ↑Wed Jul 28, 2021 11:29 am This is a very good article that is specifically relevant by a dude who’s generally considered the best on the planet with this stuff - it even describes Google as a monopoly
https://stratechery.com/2019/regulating ... o-out/Yeah
Follow this guy if you want to understand more than what News Corp wants you to know.
Edit: paywall. Wait - I’ll post it later.
Re: The Australian Politics Thread
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2021 11:27 am
I've heard Dutton is doing his numbers. He didn't get them right last time so I don't know if that might prompt him to do them properly for the next spill or not. At this point, I don't know who is worse.