Well, seems like I've clearly responded to posts where I think you've made stuff up to support the position. For example, your claim that closed platforms are anti-competitive.
They are and that's quite obvious. Apple does not allow certain kinds of apps in the App Store. That's anti-competitive.
It's also in the public's best interest to have closed platforms.
I disagree. A gatekeeper allows for massive abuse. Apps get pulled at a moment's notice for no reason. That is not in society's best interest. Furthermore, the gatekeeper model allows authoritarian regimes to force whatever unethical and immoral requirements on the gatekeeper as a "cost of doing business."
I just think it's hypocritical to use "freedom!" as a shield when you are literally arguing for the government to force your preference on others.
As I've said before, certain industries deserve regulation and scrutiny. I think it's fair that we regulate utilities and telecoms. There's a clear benefit to society. I think the same should hold true for computing platforms that billions of people use every day. It's the government's job to protect the people from abusive corporations.
Apple's behavior is abusive and just because Android exists, that doesn't mean we should all just roll over and tolerate it. Imagine if you were a vape company that spent millions of dollars developing a product and a companion app only to have Apple capriciously pull your app from the app store because of a sudden, irrational media frenzy around vaping. Are you really going to defend such behavior?
Apple shouldn't get to be the moral arbiter of the entire iOS platform. They shouldn't get to ruin other businesses on a whim because they're worried about optics. There were other ways to travel back in the day, but it still made sense to regulate the railroads. Throughout American corporate history, one thing is undeniable. When allowed to do as they please, corporations always, inevitably, become abusive. I do believe in freedom, but I also believe that corporations need rules and boundaries or we'll all be living in 1920s coal mining Appalachia going to the company doctor, getting paid in company scrip, sending our kids to the company school...
I don't. I choose not to use Facebook and other apps that don't respect my idea of privacy.
Likewise!
This is pretty basic stuff here. The government forcing changes to a legal business model is far different than two companies deciding to go into business together under specific terms.
Yes, absolutely.
FWIW, in my view, I think the US government is clearly violating the first amendment by compelling speech and interfering with the freedom of association with these proposed regulations.
I disagree. Corporations are not people. The government is here to protect the people. The Constitution was written for the people, not corporations. This is just our time's version of the railroads or telecoms. Industries need to be policed and abusive behavior needs to be checked. The big industry today is tech and it's due for some guardrails.
Nope. I believe in freedom. And I believe you do too. But I don't believe in using it as an excuse to force to my view on others.
See my comments above. Unfettered freedom for corporations ultimately leads to abusive behavior. Our country's history is littered with examples. If a powerful corporation uses its power in an abusive way, it should be forced to change. Ultimately I believe in freedom for the people, but less so in freedom for corporations.
Two companies voluntarily choosing to do business under certain terms isn't "force". This is what I mean about you making stuff up to support an otherwise reasonable argument.
I agree. However, I don't think that you can ignore the fact that, to get your app on the iOS platform, you have to do whatever Apple says. Choosing not to means losing access to the platform. My way or the highway. No negotiation. The user doesn't even get to decide if he or she is okay with whatever the third party wants to do. This is the problem with gatekeepers. One entity gets to exercise enormous power and the only choice for the user or developer is to abandon the platform. That is not beneficial to society. Then you add the clear abuses like the vape example, which is indefensible, and it's very clear why regulations like the ones proposed (and sure to become law soon...the writing is on the wall) are needed.
