Dan LuuA tech-focused analysis of the 2011-2012 FTC antitrust investigation of Google:
kouhai, of the health issues@danluu found a typo?
> There was then a 1998 suit by the DoJ about Microsoft's use of monopoly power in the browser market, which initially led to a 2020 decision to break Microsoft up. But, on appeal, the breakup was overturned, which led to a settlement in 2002. A major component of the 1998 case was about browser bundling and Microsoft's attack on Netscape
My history’s a bit fuzzy, but I believe this should be:
s/2020/2000/
Fazal Majid@danluu you are assuming the BE position is a good-faith one, which is a stretch. It reflects the Chicago school ideology that since markets are perfect and infallible, monopolies and trusts are a logical impossibility, and wormed its way into the US legal system via Robert Bork:
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/robert-borks-america/
(That’s a conservative publication, by the way, not inclined to be inimical to Bork).
Personally I believe antitrust and derived concepts like network neutrality are doomed to fail due to the vagaries of Common Law, and only self-enforcing mechanisms stand a chance, namely Structural Separation.
Sophia Wisdom@danluu
"are strong and at there's" -> "are strong as there's" maybe?
There's also something weird going on with these <a> tag where the title is one of the footnotes, both in "these are trivial switching costs" and " triggering Losing CTR and google.com query distribution data triggering accuracy; comprehensiveness"
"are strong and at there's" -> "are strong as there's" maybe?
There's also something weird going on with these <a> tag where the title is one of the footnotes, both in "these are trivial switching costs" and " triggering Losing CTR and google.com query distribution data triggering accuracy; comprehensiveness"
@cis_female Hmm, the weird link thing seems to be a Hugo markdown parser bug.
I'm not sure how to fix or work around that one. I guess I can try changing things randomly to see how it goes.