Avoid Dividing Up Big Tech

In Washington, the worst concepts are frequently nonpartisan. If it hasn’t already, Big Tech is about to learn this lesson.

Elizabeth Warren recently unveiled a controversial proposal to break up Big Tech firms, the kind of excessively ambitious government initiative that in the past would have sparked automatic Republican resistance. no longer. Who says that none of us can get along?

When a congressman tweeted his (understandable) complaint that Facebook removed its ads attacking Facebook and other technology companies, Ted Cruz – in a retweet heard around the world – admitted that those companies have great power. There Are Five Ways That Technology is Altering the Insurance Sector

Technology is caught in a right-wing pincer movement, fueled by the populist spirit that runs through both sides. Conservatives don’t like these companies because they own and operate by promoting Silicon Valley liberals under the worst possible stereotypes. Progressives don’t like them because they are big profit making companies. That is why there is a chance that Washington will come together and, in the sense that Warren suggested, ban the business model of some of the most successful American companies and brands. It is the most obvious proof that, yes, we are losing our minds. Warren’s idea of ​​separating the platform from the technology companies and making them work as “platform tools” separate from their other businesses cannot work and is supported by many errors and injustices.

It’s not true, as Warren insists, that antitrust cases against Microsoft in the 1990s opened the door for Google and Facebook to prosper. Microsoft did not have the Internet and left an open space for Google and Facebook itself, as is often the case with a large user involved in its successful business model (in Microsoft’s case, based on physical computers ).

Related article: Undergraduate Student Technology Issues and Needs

He accuses tech companies of using mergers to limit competition and points to Facebook’s acquisition of WhatsApp as an example. It’s hard to know what’s wrong here. When the social network bought it, WhatsApp was available for money. Now it’s free and more people are using it than ever. What is the problem? He calls out Google for allegedly killing competitors by burying them in its search. It’s not clear that Google is actually doing this, although its search business involves making constant choices to try to match what people want to see. No official administrator will improve Google search 에볼루션미니게임, nor is it competent to try.

Warren’s policy is clearly set without regard to the interests of workers and consumers, who made the technology industry great in the first place. Why does Google provide a tool without which it is impossible to imagine modern life – and open a large vista of information that is available quickly – for free? Because he can use advertising to make money. Without advertising revenue, which Warren says should be a separate business, Google has no incentive to hire engineers to constantly improve its search engine. 온라인카지노

Likewise, it won’t help anyone to have iPhones that no longer ship or sell Apple accessories. Would people really want to go to two different Amazon sites, one just for the platform, and the other for selling Amazon products?

This is absurd, so the mergers Warren promised to destroy, including Amazon’s acquisition of Whole Foods. As a doctrine is something wrong? Amazon has nothing to do with just grocery retailers. Instead of controlling the sector, it encourages investment in innovation. The largest supermarket chain in the country, Kroger was founded in 1883. It is expected to increase its capital expenditure by 200% in 2018, developing self-service inspection equipment and robotic delivery, precisely because the space is very competitive.

We’ve seen the same effect in marketing. Behind Amazon, Target invested heavily to improve across the board and, in one quarter in 2018, posted the best sales growth in more than a decade. This past holiday season, it outdid Amazon by offering free two-day shipping. It is a working market, which is not short-circuited.

Tech giants are not independent companies. The top five research and development spenders in 2017 are all technology companies. Amazon alone spent over $22 billion. The development of autonomous cars, human intelligence and voice recognition would not be as advanced as it is today without Google and Amazon. Last year’s runner-up, General Electric, didn’t make these investments. None of this is to deny that there are legitimate concerns about the tech industry. They want rules for content that respect neutrality and the spirit of the First Amendment, and perhaps there should be stricter privacy standards. Their business practices are not above scrutiny. But any real damage should be fixed and the corrections refer to specific behavior, not a major political restructuring, of all institutions.

If you had any doubts, watch it garner praise in Washington from both parties. That is a really awful idea.

Related article: Buy HR Technology in 5 Steps