• Rhaedas@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    I agree that’s it’s a “hate the game, not the player”. The issue is how much influence he could have to steer the market to favor his product vs. the competition. It’s happened so many times in history where the better product fails because they can’t play the game like the inferior company.

    To quote “Pirates of Silicon Valley”:

    Steve Jobs: We’re better than you are! We have better stuff.

    Bill Gates: You don’t get it, Steve. That doesn’t matter!

    So is it fair for the consumer for big companies to be able to influence the game itself and not just play within the same rules? I’d say no.

    • jmanes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      I don’t think you’re really addressing my comment, which is just a criticism of how folks write about these “hypocrisies.”

      Of course it’s not fair; that’s the entire foundational pillar on which capitalism rests. I’m not saying “hate the game, not the player”. Rather I’m saying the game is bullshit and the player should have his balls kicked with steel toed boot repeatedly.

      • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        Ok, what do you suggest? There isn’t any alternatives. You can just ignore the opinion of some billionaire and be done with it.

        • jmanes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 month ago

          We do not have the option to ignore the opinions of billionaires. Their opinions become government policy through lobbying and it impacts us all.