Google to be hit by €1B ($1.12B) fine within weeks as EU finds it guilty in antitrust case

[Trixanity]

3 hours ago, FakezZ said:

Oh yeees more regulation haha. GIMME DAT REGULATION! Because regulations have always worked... Not.

Well, not in Greece, no. Kinda defeats the purpose of enacting regulation when everyone ignores it ;-)

[Energycore]

On 6/16/2017 at 0:31 PM, wcreek said:

It's not the anti trust laws, I think they're fine. But the EU does this to lots of companies. 

You hate the EU for standing up for themselves against corporate shenanigans such as antitrust?

[FakezZ]

8 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

Well, not in Greece, no. Kinda defeats the purpose of enacting regulation when everyone ignores it ;-)

It does not have to do with Greece. The free market works and is ethical and enacting more regulations only makes things worse for the smaller companies while the rich ones can just pay the government to get away with just about anything while fucking up the little guy. So yes regulations work nowhere. If only people in Greece could understand how the economy works that would be great. Damn socialists.

[Trixanity]

4 minutes ago, FakezZ said:

It does not have to do with Greece. The free market works and is ethical and enacting more regulations only makes things worse for the smaller companies while the rich ones can just pay the government to get away with just about anything while fucking up the little guy. So yes regulations work nowhere. If only people in Greece could understand how the economy works that would be great. Damn socialists.

Depends on multiple factors. If the government is corrupt it will benefit the privileged whomever that may be (eg corporations and the wealthy). Regulation can stifle innovation and competition but it can also do the opposite. It depends on how you use it. If I recall the US had little to no regulation in the 1800s that resulted in massive corporations gobbling up the competition and creating monopolies (eg the steel industry). This affects not only businesses but also other aspects such as employees who had terrible conditions.

 

It's a difficult balancing act but I don't see any example of removing all or most regulation improving anything. Maybe in the short term but long term corporations would entrench themselves through sheer power. It's a matter of accountability too - who would stop you if there is no power to do so? The classic answer is the market will, one way or another, but will it really?

 

Getting off topic though.

[FakezZ]

12 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

Depends on multiple factors. If the government is corrupt it will benefit the privileged whomever that may be (eg corporations and the wealthy). Regulation can stifle innovation and competition but it can also do the opposite. It depends on how you use it. If I recall the US had little to no regulation in the 1800s that resulted in massive corporations gobbling up the competition and creating monopolies (eg the steel industry). This affects not only businesses but also other aspects such as employees who had terrible conditions.

 

It's a difficult balancing act but I don't see any example of removing all or most regulation improving anything. Maybe in the short term but long term corporations would entrench themselves through sheer power. It's a matter of accountability too - who would stop you if there is no power to do so? The classic answer is the market will, one way or another, but will it really?

 

Getting off topic though.

But there is no government that is not corrupt. There is NO way you can give people power and they will not use it for their own benefit. And yes with little regulation there will be more competition making monopolies pretty much impossible and if there are then they are good monopolies. The only way a monopoly can form and be sustained is with government regulation. Because the government is the only place where you can exchange money for power.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, FakezZ said:

But there is no government that is not corrupt. There is NO way you can give people power and they will not use it for their own benefit. And yes with little regulation there will be more competition making monopolies pretty much impossible and if there are then they are good monopolies. The only way a monopoly can form and be sustained is with government regulation. Because the government is the only place where you can exchange money for power.

 I think you need to study political science.  I lot of what you said just is not true.  All institutions have the potential to be corrupt.  Humans are greedy and survivalist by nature. In order to survive as a community (which we are whether it suits our ideals or not) we need government oversight and part of that oversight is to place restrictions on certain activities. These prevent those with more power (be it physical strength or financial position) from taking advantage of those with less.  Fair regulation is necessary and unrestricted capitalist behaviour is just as bad as enforced socialist dictatorship.   In the US it is an unrestricted capitalist dictatorship, corporations throw money at the senators/congressmen until they vote in a law that suits them.  This is why you have dumb ass laws that allow at+t to write contracts that forbid you from taking legal action against them when they force you to pay more under the same contract, this is why you have ISP issues with cable and net neutrality.  We don't have those issues here in Australia, not because our government isn't corrupt, but because Australians don't re-elect the dodgy ones who have been caught with their pants down. 

 

Basically the people need to keep their governments in check and the governments need to keep the greedy in check.   But both required regulation in order to do that.

 

 

[Centurius]

2 hours ago, FakezZ said:

It does not have to do with Greece. The free market works and is ethical and enacting more regulations only makes things worse for the smaller companies while the rich ones can just pay the government to get away with just about anything while fucking up the little guy. So yes regulations work nowhere. If only people in Greece could understand how the economy works that would be great. Damn socialists.

Do you enjoy not getting poisoned by your drinking water? That's government regulation.

[FakezZ]

38 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 I think you need to study political science.  I lot of what you said just is not true.  All institutions have the potential to be corrupt.  Humans are greedy and survivalist by nature. In order to survive as a community (which we are whether it suits our ideals or not) we need government oversight and part of that oversight is to place restrictions on certain activities. These prevent those with more power (be it physical strength or financial position) from taking advantage of those with less.  Fair regulation is necessary and unrestricted capitalist behaviour is just as bad as enforced socialist dictatorship.   In the US it is an unrestricted capitalist dictatorship, corporations throw money at the senators/congressmen until they vote in a law that suits them.  This is why you have dumb ass laws that allow at+t to write contracts that forbid you from taking legal action against them when they force you to pay more under the same contract, this is why you have ISP issues with cable and net neutrality.  We don't have those issues here in Australia, not because our government isn't corrupt, but because Australians don't re-elect the dodgy ones who have been caught with their pants down. 

 

Basically the people need to keep their governments in check and the governments need to keep the greedy in check.   But both required regulation in order to do that.

 

 

Seriously the example you just gave is the result of government involvement. If the government could not enforce regulations then AT&T could not pass stupid shit like this  It is not unrestricted capitalist dictatorship in the US, far from it... 

 

9 minutes ago, Centurius said:

Do you enjoy not getting poisoned by your drinking water? That's government regulation.

Uhmm or maybe have private companies deal with it and the ones with bad water quality will fail because nobody will buy water from them? In many places in my country the tap water is not potable just because of this issue. So yeah tell me more about how government and regulations are good.

[Centurius]

Just now, FakezZ said:

Seriously the example you just gave is the result of government involvement. If the government could not enforce regulations then AT&T could not pass stupid shit like this  It is not unrestricted capitalist dictatorship in the US, far from it... 

 

Uhmm or maybe have private companies deal with it and the ones with bad water quality will fail because nobody will buy water from them? In many places in my country the tap water is not potable just because of this issue. So yeah tell me more about how government and regulations are good.

The private sector didn't remove lead from drinking water until governments made them, so yes I definitely will tell you how they are good.

[mr moose]

Just now, FakezZ said:

Seriously the example you just gave is the result of government involvement. If the government could not enforce regulations then AT&T could not pass stupid shit like this  It is not unrestricted capitalist dictatorship in the US, far from it... 

 

Uhmm or maybe have private companies deal with it and the ones with bad water quality will fail because nobody will buy water from them? In many places in my country the tap water is not potable just because of this issue. So yeah tell me more about how government and regulations are good.

What?  seriously, you need to study political science.  What you are saying makes zero sense.  The goivernment has done nothing to address the legality of contracts like the AT&T one.  That is why it exists.  It is a classic example of using a position of power to extort customers. 

[FakezZ]

Just now, mr moose said:

What?  seriously, you need to study political science.  What you are saying makes zero sense.  The goivernment has done nothing to address the legality of contracts like the AT&T one.  That is why it exists.  It is a classic example of using a position of power to extort customers. 

It is really funny that you think that the problem of AT&T paying the government to have stupid regulations passed will be solved with more regulation. It only needs logic and not "political science" tbh.
 

 

4 minutes ago, Centurius said:

The private sector didn't remove lead from drinking water until governments made them, so yes I definitely will tell you how they are good.

Which again could be solved with more competition and the customers choosing the companies that make the water to be less corrosive to the piping so that lead will not get into it... We are both trying to fix the problem, but my approach gives choice and does not involve the big mama government to save us all...

[mr moose]

Just now, FakezZ said:

It is really funny that you think that the problem of AT&T paying the government to have stupid regulations passed will be solved with more regulation. It only needs logic and not "political science" tbh.
 

 

Which again could be solved with more competition and the customers choosing the companies that make the water to be less corrosive to the piping so that lead will not get into it... We are both trying to fix the problem, but my approach gives choice and does not involve the big mama government to save us all...

If it only needs logic then you need to start using it.    You seem to think regulations will cause more problems,  I have already given you an example of problems stemming from the company and not government intervention.  Companies will do anything to turn a dollar, don't be so naive to think they are ethical or that unchecked capitalism is fair.  Without government regulation you end up in a stink hole controlled by corporations.     The reason we don't have issues like the AT&T affair in Aus., is because contracts that stipulate you have no right to take legal action or give one party unfair control are illegal and the courts dismiss them.  This is government  regulation and it works.  You know what else is government regulation?  rape laws, murder laws, theft laws, drink driving laws.   All the laws that keep us safe from selfish morons who think they are entitled to do whatever they please.  CEO's and directors are no different to any another human.

[FakezZ]

6 minutes ago, mr moose said:

If it only needs logic then you need to start using it.    You seem to think regulations will cause more problems,  I have already given you an example of problems stemming from the company and not government intervention.  Companies will do anything to turn a dollar, don't be so naive to think they are ethical or that unchecked capitalism is fair.  Without government regulation you end up in a stink hole controlled by corporations.     The reason we don't have issues like the AT&T affair in Aus., is because contracts that stipulate you have no right to take legal action or give one party unfair control are illegal and the courts dismiss them.  This is government  regulation and it works.  You know what else is government regulation?  rape laws, murder laws, theft laws, drink driving laws.   All the laws that keep us safe from selfish morons who think they are entitled to do whatever they please.  CEO's and directors are no different to any another human.

This is getting out of hand in terms of ignorance. First the fact that congress CAN pass laws that determine how a business should work and what it HAS to do IS government regulation. Once the government has such power then the politicians who ALSO want more money will be paid by the corporations to pass whatever laws they please making it very difficult for competition to exist. If the government did not have such power then this would not happen and companies who treat customers like shit or are overcharging for shit would plain and simple fail and go bankrupt. Also Australia has very expensive Internet which is also very slow as I have relatives there and they have told me. Also who the hell talked about laws? We were talking about regulations to companies. Although I think most laws should be abolished as well and society should work based on the NAP, but this is way off topic.

[LAwLz]

2 hours ago, FakezZ said:

And yes with little regulation there will be more competition making monopolies pretty much impossible and if there are then they are good monopolies. The only way a monopoly can form and be sustained is with government regulation. Because the government is the only place where you can exchange money for power.

You got to be kidding me...

You are either trolling, or do not understand the basics of the things you are talking about.

 

 

5 minutes ago, FakezZ said:

This is getting out of hand in terms of ignorance.

This is possibly the only thing you have written in this thread that I agree with.

 

5 minutes ago, FakezZ said:

If the government did not have such power then this would not happen and companies who treat customers like shit or are overcharging for shit would plain and simple fail and go bankrupt.

Are you for real?

You do realize that there are countless of examples where companies did threat customers like shit, and only after government regulations did things get a bit better, right?

[System Error Message]

i in this case it should be the anti thrust laws of google shopping to be inadequate. I've tried using google shopping before, the only results i get were from a few websites i know and ebay and amazon. So my own skills at finding items online is better than google shopping. Even google search is better but theres effort needed to manually compare prices.

 

Honestly this fine should be that google shopping is inadequate, not because of favouritism, monopoly or bias,

 

I am in the UK though.

[FakezZ]

4 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

You got to be kidding me...

You are either trolling, or do not understand the basics of the things you are talking about.

 

 

This is possibly the only thing you have written in this thread that I agree with.

 

Are you for real?

You do realize that there are countless of examples where companies did threat customers like shit, and only after government regulations did things get a bit better, right?

I am trolling? Please educate me on these things. Is the problem not the government passing laws that favor big companies that pay them? Are you not saying that the government should have more power to fix the problem caused by it? Please tell me how I am the idiot here, because you fit all the characteristics of an actual troll. Yes only for things to get worse later when companies realized they can give money to the politicians to do whatever they want. And you say we should give them even more power. THIS IS HILARIOUS.

Edit: To give an analogy to this to make it simpler to understand. It is like if a group screws you over because another group paid them. You say that you want the first group to have even more power so that they can screw you over more easily rather than give them less so the second group can have no power over you. This is the level of stupidity we have reached here.

[LAwLz]

1 minute ago, FakezZ said:

Is the problem not the government passing laws that favor big companies that pay them?

Government passing laws that benefits big companies is a problem, but saying that we should therefore abolish all regulations is quite frankly stupid and shows a complete lack of understanding how the world works.

Have you ever heard of the phrase "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater"?

 

Want an example? ISPs in the US are working together to ensure that customers do not have multiple choices. In some areas, ISP actually agreed with each other "you get this area, if I get this one".

"Ohh but the free market would sort that out because bad companies won't get any customers". That's not how the world works. Starting an ISP is extremely hard (near impossible these days) and there are only a few companies that can do it. That's why you need government regulations to ensure that the companies don't just screw their customers and kill competitors.

 

Or how about environmental protection? Properly taking care of for example radioactive waste is very expensive, so without regulations companies would not do it. If the damage is only caused after a long period of time then customers wouldn't even notice it until it was too late. All they would see would be company A having lower prices (because they for example dump chemicals into the drinking water) with the same quality as company B (which has more overhead because they properly dispose of their chemicals).

So company A would for example cause cancer in people who were living near their factories, but since those effects could appear 30 years from now everyone would be happy in the short term. And before you say anything, that's just one example I made up now to show that your logic is flawed. Companies can greatly benefit from screwing over their customers, and customers might not realize it before it's too late, or they might not have any choice (such as with ISPs in the US).

 

 

5 minutes ago, FakezZ said:

And you say we should give them even more power.

Where did I say that exactly?

[System Error Message]

6 minutes ago, FakezZ said:

I am trolling? Please educate me on these things. Is the problem not the government passing laws that favor big companies that pay them? Are you not saying that the government should have more power to fix the problem caused by it? Please tell me how I am the idiot here, because you fit all the characteristics of an actual troll. Yes only for things to get worse later when companies realized they can give money to the politicians to do whatever they want. And you say we should give them even more power. THIS IS HILARIOUS.

Edit: To give an analogy to this to make it simpler to understand. It is like if a group screws you over because another group paid them. You say that you want the first group to have even more power so that they can screw you over more easily rather than give them less so the second group can have no power over you. This is the level of stupidity we have reached here.

to add to your argument you're both wrong. Some companies will follow the rules as new ones come out as its a marketing term they can use to that say they abide by the rules and regulations, however there are some companies out there that no matter what rules and regulations you impose, you just cant get them to follow it, as that company is established already and perhaps could be important in some way.

 

giving governments more power or taking away power just wont work, no matter what system you impose things will still go wrong, its human nature and greed is a big part of it. Theres nothing to stop a government from bring the military down on a business but than people will accuse the government of being a totalitarian. Just know that some humans want to do whats right and most however couldnt care less about others.

[FakezZ]

Just now, LAwLz said:

Government passing laws that benefits big companies is a problem, but saying that we should therefore abolish all regulations is quite frankly stupid and shows a complete lack of understanding how the world works.

Have you ever heard of the phrase "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater"?

 

Want an example? ISPs in the US are working together to ensure that customers do not have multiple choices. In some areas, ISP actually agreed with each other "you get this area, if I get this one".

"Ohh but the free market would sort that out because bad companies won't get any customers". That's not how the world works. Starting an ISP is extremely hard (near impossible these days) and there are only a few companies that can do it. That's why you need government regulations to ensure that the companies don't just screw their customers and kill competitors.

 

Or how about environmental protection? Properly taking care of for example radioactive waste is very expensive, so without regulations companies would not do it. If the damage is only caused after a long period of time then customers wouldn't even notice it until it was too late. All they would see would be company A having lower prices (because they for example dump chemicals into the drinking water) with the same quality as company B (which has more overhead because they properly dispose of their chemicals).

So company A would for example cause cancer in people who were living near their factories, but since those effects could appear 30 years from now everyone would be happy in the short term. And before you say anything, that's just one example I made up now to show that your logic is flawed. Companies can greatly benefit from screwing over their customers, and customers might not realize it before it's too late, or they might not have any choice (such as with ISPs in the US).

 

 

Where did I say that exactly?

 

Quote

Starting an ISP is extremely hard

BUT THIS IS THE PROBLEM WITH REGULATIONS! See, this is why the free market works. For example near me a startup ISP just launched and the current partly government-owned ISP called OTE started upgrading the infrastructure. Then the local authorities made it very hard for them to expand by not allowing them to dig to put fiber. So OTE just upgraded the infrastructure where they have their network and the rest of the people deal with shitty Internet. In the cancer example. If they did something that could cause cancer to people, then believe me they'd know and they would not buy from that company and/or the companies that supply from them or they would not work for them. Then the company would be forced to get better or go bankrupt. Isn't it simple?

[W-L]

This will be the only mention, keep things on the topic.

 

Quote

Generally speaking, as long as the following rules are met you should never find yourself subject to disciplinary action:

• Ensure a friendly atmosphere to our visitors and forum members.
• Encourage the freedom of expression and exchange of information in a mature and responsible manner.
• "Don't be a dick" - Wil Wheaton.
• "Be excellent to each other" - Bill and Ted.
• Remember your audience; both present and future.

No Trolling

• This includes flame wars such as NVIDIA vs AMD, political or religious debate.

 

[mr moose]

16 minutes ago, FakezZ said:

 

BUT THIS IS THE PROBLEM WITH REGULATIONS! See, this is why the free market works. For example near me a startup ISP just launched and the current partly government-owned ISP called OTE started upgrading the infrastructure. Then the local authorities made it very hard for them to expand by not allowing them to dig to put fiber. So OTE just upgraded the infrastructure where they have their network and the rest of the people deal with shitty Internet. In the cancer example. If they did something that could cause cancer to people, then believe me they'd know and they would not buy from that company and/or the companies that supply from them or they would not work for them. Then the company would be forced to get better or go bankrupt. Isn't it simple?

 

 A free market works, but only if all the players are fair.    I personally believe in a free market, I like the ideal of a global economy where everyone trades the same currency has the same capacity to earn and if they wish to capitalise they can, It's just that it is not possible without government regulation because (as I have said countless times) humans are greedy and when they run big companies they have more power to be greedy with.   Regulation is necessary.   Governments are necessary.

[System Error Message]

6 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

 A free market works, but only if all the players are fair.    I personally believe in a free market, I like the ideal of a global economy where everyone trades the same currency has the same capacity to earn and if they wish to capitalise they can, It's just that it is not possible without government regulation because (as I have said countless times) humans are greedy and when they run big companies they have more power to be greedy with.   Regulation is necessary.   Governments are necessary.

even governments are greedy. So its a problem with both the people and the government. Many asian countries have this problem, its worse in asia than it is in US or europe and i've been ripped off by US businesses before so its a widespread problem.

[FakezZ]

Just now, mr moose said:

 

 A free market works, but only if all the players are fair.    I personally believe in a free market, I like the ideal of a global economy where everyone trades the same currency has the same capacity to earn and if they wish to capitalise they can, It's just that it is not possible without government regulation because (as I have said countless times) humans are greedy and when they run big companies they have more power to be greedy with.   Regulation is necessary.   Governments are necessary.

Well it is great that we at least agree on the free market. Now why should we give the politicians who are also very greedy the power to get money from companies to pass regulations that favor them or sabotage competition? Do not get me wrong everyone is greedy, but regulations is not the way to go. Believe me I live in a country where I wanted to open a company and I can't because there is so much regulation and I have to pay the government money even if I get 0 revenue. How stupid is that? The way to go I'd say is just let the companies be greedy like politicians, but they will fail and go bankrupt rather than get a pat on the back and get away with screwing people over like the government does. This is competition and the government has no competition. I see it with public health care as well. I went to the hospital for something that was not very serious and while I was getting treated I saw people coming in critical condition and they were waiting for me to get my stomach cleaned because I took some wrong pills that did not even have that serious side effects. These people just did not give a damn because they will get paid no matter if everyone dies or not.

[mr moose]

3 minutes ago, System Error Message said:

even governments are greedy. So its a problem with both the people and the government. Many asian countries have this problem, its worse in asia than it is in US or europe and i've been ripped off by US businesses before so its a widespread problem.

Which is why I said:

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

 

Basically the people need to keep their governments in check and the governments need to keep the greedy in check.   But both required regulation in order to do that.

 

 

3 minutes ago, FakezZ said:

Well it is great that we at least agree on the free market. Now why should we give the politicians who are also very greedy the power to get money from companies to pass regulations that favor them or sabotage competition? Do not get me wrong everyone is greedy, but regulations is not the way to go. Believe me I live in a country where I wanted to open a company and I can't because there is so much regulation and I have to pay the government money even if I get 0 revenue. How stupid is that? The way to go I'd say is just let the companies be greedy like politicians, but they will fail and go bankrupt rather than get a pat on the back and get away with screwing people over like the government does. This is competition and the government has no competition. I see it with public health care as well. I went to the hospital for something that was not very serious and while I was getting treated I saw people coming in critical condition and they were waiting for me to get my stomach cleaned because I took some wrong pills that did not even have that serious side effects. These people just did not give a damn because they will get paid no matter if everyone dies or not.

 

The problem is corporations don't go bankrupt when they go unregulated, they just dig in deeper with the greed, that is why the US has so many problems with ISP monopolies, NN, mobile phone contracts and to a lesser extent consumer protection laws.   As I said above, governments need to be kept in check by the people, but corporations need to be kept in check by governments that is their job.

[FakezZ]

Just now, mr moose said:

Which is why I said:

 

 

The problem is corporations don't go bankrupt when they go unregulated, they just dig in deeper with the greed, that is why the US has so many problems with ISP monopolies, NN, mobile phone contracts and to a lesser extent consumer protection laws.   As I said above, governments need to be kept in check by the people, but corporations need to be kept in check by governments that is their job.

Again we are trying to fix the same problem, but we have different solutions in mind. What you are saying is what is currently happening and it cannot work. You cannot keep the government in check because everyone is corrupted by having power. Even if you change the people in charge the same happens. The only reason companies do not go bankrupt is through monopolies which are also created by the government regulations in the way I described with my hardships in starting a company.