If a company doesn't want at least some element of that, the solution is very simple: drop below a USD $10B valuation by spinning off parts of the company. Note that I said TEN BILLION DOLLARS. A "decacorn". That is an unfathomable amount of money. If you've created a company worth that much you've won at capitalism.
If governments had a good track record I'd advocate for that. No need for strawmen like five year plans, I think competition is a wonderful thing.
My underlying, strong belief is that corporations are legal fictions created primarily to benefit society, Milton Friedman's philosophy notwithstanding.
It’s not hard core capitalism. It’s that geeks hate when people make their own choices without government interference because normal people don’t care that they can’t run Linux on the Apple Pencil.
It’s also naiveté to think that government power isn’t the most dangerous kind of power imaginable even though almost every law proposed by the government with regards to tech is roundly criticized by the same people.
> It’s also naiveté to think that government power isn’t the most dangerous kind of power imaginable
That's only true if the market isn't free. If private businesses are not kept in check, they can (and have) overthrown government power. Ask me how I know!
The suggestion was simply that companies that make more than 10 billion should be forced to give back to society. That's it. To be against that is indeed hard core capitalism, bordering on religious fervor.
They do give back to society - they provide jobs, pay taxes, and mobile has created millions of jobs and put computers in billions of people’s pockets.
Design-by-committee doesn't sound half-bad if it can standardize a single serial cable that doesn't have licensing fees. Doesn't resemble an unreasonable use of government power at all.
I don’t think that’s the argument you think it is. Thought experiment, grab a random USB C cable, now tell me:
1. What speed can you transfer data through it?
2. How much power can it deliver?
3. Can it support video over USB C?
4. Say a random device comes with a USB-A cable on one side and a USB-c on the other. Now take a standard usb c/usb c cable, will it always charge the device?
Also when that same government first wanted to “standardize”. They wanted to standardize on micro-USB.
> Thought experiment, grab a random USB C cable, now tell me
Oh, easy. Apple already solved this one; if it has the Thunderbolt logo, it's maxed out. If it's anything else, you're usually getting at least 5w charging and USB 2.0 speeds. In other words, the worst-case scenario is usually slightly better than Lightning.
I travel with a portable monitor that gets power and video from one USB-c cable. It works with both my personal MacBook Air and my work Windows laptop.
> So your solution to making sure that you get the most compatibility is to buy Apple cables for Apple devices…meet the new boss.
I was hoping you'd bite the hook, but not like this...
Intel actually designed the spec, drivers and IC controllers for Thunderbolt. Apple consulted on it with USB-IF, but they don't own the spec like they do with Lightning. They're less of a new boss, and more subsuming their rightful position as a valued consultant on a shared standard. It's a good (albeit old) example of Apple doing the right thing through the right channels.
If governments had a good track record I'd advocate for that. No need for strawmen like five year plans, I think competition is a wonderful thing.
My underlying, strong belief is that corporations are legal fictions created primarily to benefit society, Milton Friedman's philosophy notwithstanding.