37 Burst results for "Big Tech"
Fresh update on "big tech" discussed on No Agenda
"All they do is they licensed the music and instead of having directors and bands make videos their actual users make the videos it's and their algorithm is only meant to entertain you for hours and hours and hours very successful. I totally get why people are so passionate about it. I don't care personally what happens, but it's a big deal to a lot of people if TIKTOK would suddenly go away and I know that there's companies trying to launch competitive sites but first of all. How do you think it would be valued at which is where we left off with our Bloomberg report You make I'm asking you to guess of course. WAS GOING TO BE OVERVALUED Let's start with that premise. What is it worth I? Think it's worth probably fifty million dollars fifty million. Gallons about a I mean they if they have one hundred, million US users, you know it's worth at least. One hundred million users each users worth. Let's say ten dollars times one, hundred, million, that's a billion. So that is really should be but now now they're gonNA value a lot higher than a billion. and. Part of that reason is because trump has created an artificial heart officials situation whereas okay. If no one buys it, you're out. If someone buys it. We want thirty percent of the deal which I think is it's isn't that does that fall under tariff laws that how he does that? I. Don't know how he's doing, but it just really be. People say the mob I mean this is a mob tack literally says, it's like a landlord. You know it's like if you WANNA pay rent you come in, you want to pay rent that you can come in as. A landlord here landlord Mirka. I'm all for it. Let's find out. The actual value would be I think it'll be something north of twenty, five, billion, I mean it isn't distressed for Sale twenty-five sale is pretty large multiple, but it's not out of the Ballpark of where Microsoft has paid in the past. Especially, if you look at get hub and by the way hearkens back to what facebook did in two thousand fourteen with WHATSAPP throwing down eighteen billion dollars unaccompanied pre monetization. Twenty five, billion now bad. Don't think will ever accept it. But be pretty decent offer. Speaking of the Big Tech. Something very interesting happened. In this caught my ear. Last week, we had the the big tech CEOS. Phoning it in for the committee. I do have one clip I picked up from that I did let's let's do it. Let's do that and then I'll play mine which he got. Okay I. Have I got Matt gets our Buddy WHO's the Florida? Trump. it trump not. And he's armed buddy all of a sudden this new. There no, but he's, but he's one of the two or three guys with Jim Jordan. There's a little try Atta these tough guys do go in there and they they pull the same stunts that the Democrats do when they start grilling somebody. and. I have get grilling the grilling. Google. Guy, on China it's part of a longer thing but but he does the same old bit. They always do as they instead of the Guy Guy The guy talk they cut him off. It's I and I might times over get out of here was a guy that I like what he had to say though you mentioned earlier in your in the discussion about. That your engagement in China was very limited but yet google has an AI China Center. The Chinese Academy of Sciences has published a paper a say that that enhanced the targeting capabilities of China's J..
EU Regulators Investigating Google's Plan to Buy Fitbit
"Union regulators say they're opening an in depth investigation into tech giant Google's plan to buy fitness tracking device make a Fitbit. The EU's concerned the Fitbit deal would entrench Google's position in the online ad market by increasing the already vast amount of data that the company could use to personalize. Adds its probe aims to ensure the controlled by Google over such data collected through wearable devices is not this thought competition. EU worries for such an advantage would raise barriers for rivals to match Google's online services while the probe under schools the use role in global efforts to regulate big tech I'm Charles. The asthma. The
Fresh update on "big tech" discussed on Dennis Prager
"So deep that always said the C word corruption. That is what has held third World countries back. They have a great brain power. A great resource is in many instances like Africa. But there's so much corruption. The left has made that possible in the United States. To hide to purposely hide. The possible hope. The sickness that runs through the big tech people. They have a contempt for people who were sick. Come on the part. Love of the of the big tech companies that they would not allow you to hear. About Hydroxy Chlorate clinic. If a loved one of yours gets co fit That evil, my friend. These people who think they're good. They are doing evil. There is blood on their hands. If there's any truth to the hydroxy Claure, Clint Which is used in many countries. But what I am telling you now cannot be stated on Facebook. Cannot be getting Cannot be stated on a tweet. We'll pretend he was locked out for a week from Twitter. Because we re tweeted the doctors who said that I dropped the chlorate. Quinn might work. The left Hates Donald Trump more than they love life itself. That is how morally sick the left is. And you will vote Democrat How do you justify it morally help! Oh, look, a trumped trumps a lawyer Trump lawyer criminal. Are you a child? Your disgust, which is I don't even think legitimate. But even if it is your discussed with Donald Trump is Mohr important than the welfare of America. Look It's.
EU regulators investigating Google's plan to buy Fitbit
"Union regulators say they're opening an in depth investigation into tech giant Google's plan to buy fitness tracking device make a Fitbit. The EU's concerned the Fitbit deal would entrench Google's position in the online ad market by increasing the already vast amount of data that the company could use to personalize. Adds its probe aims to ensure the controlled by Google over such data collected through wearable devices is not this thought competition. You worries that's such an advantage would raise barriers for rivals to match Google's online services while the probe under schools the use role in global efforts to regulate big tech I'm Charles Asthma. The
EU regulators investigate Google's plan to buy Fitbit
"Data European collection Union for the regulators twenty twenty census say is the ending opening Rowley an in depth investigation the census bureau into says tech door giant knocking Google's in plan the ability to of buy households fitness tracking to respond device to maker the questionnaire Fitbit will the stop E. U.'s at the end concerned of September the Fitbit a deal month earlier with entrenched than planned Google's position the bureau in says the online it's making the move market to meet by and ended increasing the year deadline the already to submit vast the numbers amount of data used to that redraw the company could congressional use to districts personalize the ads change concerns its probe researchers aims politicians to ensure and the control civil rights by Google activists the such data who believe collected the data through collection wearable process devices will miss does hard not distort to count competition communities the including E. U. worries minorities that and such immigrants an advantage and produce would raise less barriers trustworthy for rivals data to match I'm my company Google's online services well the probe on the schools the E. U.'s role in global efforts to regulate big tech I'm Charles the last month
Grilled by Lawmakers, Big Tech Turns Up the Gaslight
"Everything all week just to give you the top five stories, and this week we're going to kick it off with the four major tech CEOs appearing before Congress. And as I looked at it, and as I watched the bits and pieces of it, it started to remind me of something, and I thought, What was that? What is that? I looked up in Webster's dictionary online, the definition of gas lighting. You know what that means? Gas lighting. It's a form of psychological manipulation. Distorting the truth. To confuse aren't still doubt is the official definition until the other person questions reality. Because there they were Amazon's Jeff because those apples Tim Cook, Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg and Google soon DARPA Che telling Congress why they shouldn't be broken up where they should be regulated. So America's CEO censors who for years have spied on all of us in a cellar data, and you tell this to be true, But Jeff Bezos actually said the on ly things People trust more than amazon dot com. Is their personal position and the U. S military, really. He's got AA lot of high hopes and not very humble opinion of himself, which I said that users clearly don't want to be tracked by those little bits of code called cookies, but Wait a minute. Didn't last year he have a speech where he defended them. Yes, he did. As a matter of fact, As for Tim Cook, he only got 30 questions compared to 60. The other Fab forgot. I guess they all like their iPhones there on the hill. And then there's Mark Zuckerberg, who argue that Facebook is not a monopoly, even though members of Congress Reference 2012 when Facebook bread they comprise 95% of all social media. And that's also right around the time that they purchased Instagram, which Zuckerberg considered a threat. He also did not remember paying teens to spy on them through Facebook research that app Which wasn't even two years ago. Maybe Mark needs little protection, don't you think? Well, the problem with these hearings is that the tech leaders or tech prose, and the folks at the hearing's not so much. One guy actually asked a question Mark Zuckerberg because he thought that Facebook on Twitter Goessling at its best, folks. Alright, Number
Amazon, Apple and Facebook shares soar amid pandemic
"For the nation's big tech Titans, Amazon, Apple and Facebook all reported blowout numbers for the spring quarter, sending their shares sharply higher in the Friday session, and Apple not only announced the four for one stock split. It also surpassed state oil giant Saudi Aramco to become the world's most valuable traded company, a market valuation of $1.84 trillion. Meanwhile, various reports Friday said Microsoft is discussing a potential purchase of popular short video app Tic Tac.
House Antitrust Subcommittee Takes Testimony From Big Tech CEOs
"As low as four dollars. Ninety nine cents a month stay tuned after the show to learn about their special offer just for talking tech listeners. So when you're asked to meet with elected officials via teleconference in Washington. DC along with your key competitors and you don't get too many questions. It's a given that you had a really really good week. And when you followed up the next day with a stunning earnings release that had one analysts say that his jaw dropped when he read the numbers while there's no question that apple CEO Tim, Cook clearly had the best week in Tech. His compatriots among the big tech CEOS like facebook's mark. Zuckerberg Google's Sundar Pichai, and Amazon's Jeff Bezos did not fare as well in DC. Now, in case you missed it. Let's breakdown for you what happened this week and begin by setting the scene facebook Google apple and Amazon CEOS recall to Capitol Hill for the first time in unison to defend themselves. Against antitrust charges and they followed it up the next day with earnings reports all on the same day or a mind boggling two hundred billion dollars combined worth of revenues in just one quarter. That's a little less than half of what America's largest company Walmart brought in for all of two thousand nineteen for the record that was five, hundred, twenty, four, billion. Now during a pandemic, when many people are forced to work or learn from home consumers responded by buying lots of new computers, ipads, and iphones from apple and a whole lot of everything from Amazon at a time when many retail stores were closed in this testimony to Congress bezos described it as like Christmas in March for the company which struggle to keep up with demand meanwhile. Google. Reported a two percent drop in revenues incidents. Advertising business was impacted too fragile economy. While facebook, which is also primarily in advertising business reported higher revenues but. With a lower increase than usual, which brings us back to cook. When you're asked to appear before Congress and defend your company, you're a loser when you walk into that environment says Jean Monster in investor analyst with Luke ventures a good day he adds is escaping from major blows like Tim Cook did cook was asked about how apple treats APP developers in place favorites at its APP store where the company clearly controls what consumers can see with ironclad enforcement. Apple gets to decide who can participate and can band people at will as it did recently with the alternative email service hey, which was initially rejected by apple cooks defense. It's all in keeping up with the quality of the store in that putting APPs in front of iphone users that invade their privacy and the like. But in the realm of antitrust government decreed that apple ditch the APP store, it's a tiny portion of its business worth less than five. And wouldn't impact apple says monster. What could happen to the other companies if they had to divest will you can see facebook ditching instagram and WHATSAPP apple ditching aws, which is its web services it was basically the backbone of many companies. It provides Internet services for many companies like Netflix men for Google maybe say goodbye YouTube. Google calendar. Google maps who knows meanwhile the chairman of the antitrust subcommittee said
"big tech" Discussed on Motley Fool Money
"Dot L. Y. Slash survey we've got a two question survey. It's GonNa take you less than a minute. I'll put the URL in the description of this podcast but you could help us we'd really appreciate it. So thanks for doing that. Let's bring in our man behind the Glass Dan boy. He's GonNa hit you with a question Jason Moser. What's on your radar this week? Sure well, just a shoutout to last week's radar stock. CORVO. Hopefully, investors saw that was a great earnings report. They had this week. So hopefully, my radar stock this week, which is seaver ticker CVs. Will witness that same type of windfall when they announce rings in a couple of weeks of Sivas in the business of wireless connectivity and Smart Sensing. Plays into all of these markets uncovering augmented virtual reality, five G. Internet of things obey operator licensing and royalty business model. So they can be really profitable as long as the Ip they have is valuable. Of course, very broad customer base and broadcom Cirrus logic Intel I, robot Sony, Samsung knee business you can you can really do well again if you take good, that's what I'm trying to ascertain. It is a small business, a small company under one billion dollar market CAP, which presents its fair share of risks in this world big tech but nevertheless one I'm digging. Dan Question about CBA certainly Chris Jason what kind of products are out there that consumers can buy that are using Seba. Seve attack had I was totally wrong? I thought you were going to ask me a question about how this might be related to Jones. Or then we were talking about some kind of question that related towards carver based on the ticker. Yet products things like the smartphone is the obvious one but we're talking about all sorts of electronic devices connected devices. That's what that's what is helping out. And across what are you looking at this week? I like kinsale capital reported earnings..
"big tech" Discussed on Motley Fool Money
"He'll joining me this week eighty and Jason Moser good to see you gentlemen efficiency its earnings Palooza. We've got so many companies reporting. We don't even have a guest this week, and as always we do have a few stocks on our radar, but we're going to begin with the big macro. The US economy suffered its worst period. Ever in the second quarter with GDP falling thirty, three percent Andy Cross is the biggest drop since GDP started getting measured seventy years ago. Yeah. Not a great quarter just because of the numbers and because of what we've been experience with the with the Cova pandemic that is an annualized number. So a quarter over quarter KRESA dropped a nine point five percent still very bad still recognizing that we are in very. Difficult. Circumstances as we are trying to come out of of a quarantine from Cova and actually we've seen some some flare ups around the country in some some some kind of further concerns but. Five point six percent on the consumer spending side the numbers just came out this week's that wasn't so bad. Chris that that was that was down a little bit from the eight point five percent the month before or the quarter before the start of the month before. So we're seeing a little bit of spending patterns. Kinda come back interesting. The personal savings rate Chris really spiked as more and more people have really held back on that spending that has hurt the GDP, numbers overall. Yeah Jason I suppose if there is a silver lining, it is good to see people saving more money. Yeah. That is nice. I'M NOT GONNA I'm not GonNa Complain. We always we always say would love to see that personal savings rate. Go Up and so you take what you can get even though that's probably somewhat of an adjusted number I guess you could say. It it does feel like. Given everything we know today it's more than reasonable to assume at least that the rest of the calendar year is going to be challenging a best case scenario. Now that said that doesn't mean things won't start getting better and it doesn't mean that we stop investing, but it really does feel like there is a. There is some sort of gap. There's some sort of disparity between the thinking of investors and Wall Street, and then the reality of the situation on the ground right I mean we're talking about this before taping were you look at the market and I mean? It's obviously been a very volatile year, but essentially, I mean, maybe a little bit down maybe we're close to flat for the year on the as. It certainly feels like it should be a lot worse based on what we know is going on on the ground in. That's my concern is that we go into the back half of the year with. Continued headwinds continued challenges that may be start to play out in the market a little bit more as we start to realize these numbers are going to be challenged at least for a little while longer. Yeah and Chris I think that most of the the challenging real environment is happening at the small and medium-sized businesses not so much on the larger companies as as as Jason. Mentioned Racine in the stock market. Right let's get to earnings. We're going to start with the Fang Stocks Amazon second quarter profit blew away wall. Street's expectations, CEO Jeff bezos called the quarter highly unusual and Jason I. Bet shareholders would be fine if the next few quarters were also highly unusual. I'm a shareholder and I'd be fine with that too. We've talked a lot about the evolving retail space and how more competition continues to enter the fray to challenge Amazon and that's true. But for now, I mean I think we're very very clear. This is still Amazon's world in. We're all just living at it I mean who grows their top line forty percent in this kind of environment I mean really that's almost insulting everyone else out there. The benefits Amazon, there they don't have just the retail business to rely on I mean when you look at Amazon web services, I know there was some criticism there in that growth. decelerated or maybe it wasn't quite as robust as analysts were hoping for but at twenty, nine, thirty percent revenue growth. The thing that really stood out to me was operating profit for aws was up sixty percent, and so now you've got forty three billion dollar run business here that is continuing to pick up share in become a more meaningful part of this business. So even if regulators have Amazon in their sights in consider breaking this company up as a shareholder. I'd rather not see that but you know what? I don't know that it really mind seeing it like I. I'd still owned companies and clearly aws is a good business and it keeps on getting better. So, I mean, let's not forget to. They had the prime day lever they're going to be able to pull. It's going to be in court for this year as opposed to quarter three. With the exception of India, where prey on August six and seven? So that's another nice little. Ever we expect towards the back half of the year two. Great Business doing a lot of great things that I think the D mentality of Jeff bezos there. He said in congressional testimony in regarding to gaining the customer's trust. He said, you earn trust slowly over time by doing hard things well, and I really feel like that's just Amazon story in a nutshell third quarter revenue for Apple rose eleven percent, which doesn't sound like a lot. But historically, this is not a big quarter for apple's business Andy and shares hitting an all time high on Friday. Yeah Chris, it was actually a really Nice quarter sales are actually up fourteen percent. If you back out some of the strong dollar effects on the foreign exchange side stellar performance across all categories including mackin IPAD that may have been benefiting from US staying at home and more of our kids staying working are at school from home. So earnings per share were up eighteen percent as I mentioned sales up fourteen percent back out the strong dollar across the board products were up ten percent. Now, seventy percent of revenues iphone was up about two percent. Mac twenty two percent. Chris, that's highest third quarter in eight years ipad sales up thirty one percent in the where bills and accessories continues to grow up seventeen percent as we've talked about the service side of the business continues to grow is now twenty two percent of total sales. Their services business was up fifteen percent demand picked up really across the board, their iphone se was a nice launch. They now have five hundred, fifty total million total subscribers across their services, Chris Versus Four, hundred and twenty, million a year ago. That's up more than thirty percent. Paid out continue to pay a dividend continue to buy back a Lotta stocks and Chris. The big headline was they announced four for one stock split as well..
Apple announces 4-1 stock split as shares cross $400
"Earnings reported by some of the big tech companies, including Apple, which has hit a record high today above $400 a share. Facebook. Also the new hype around 2 52 looks like Amazon. Amazon is on the rise, and so is alphabet Google.
Big Tech companies report mixed earnings amid pandemic
"Declined for the economy, but not for one sector. Big tech. Marty is big money even during the pandemic after we got news that the U. S economy contracted I nearly 33% of the second quarter. We've got earnings reports from some of the company's biggest tech companies. And while they're doing just fine Amazon at almost $89 billion in revenue in the second quarter, Facebook's $18 billion haul was better than expected. Google's revenues were also better than projected, an Apple reported revenues of almost $60 billion. Company also announced a four for one stock split. That gives three more shares to an investor who owns one, and it makes single shares more affordable. Current company stock trades for over $380 a share. That means buyer's gonna have the chance to purchase a share for about $100 starting in August. Right now on
Big tech CEOs testify before Congress
"So, this hearing just going to say it, it was six hours of chaos. So. So many things like individual moments of pure chaos happened this hearing. But because every member of Congress was only given five minutes to ask the questions in and they moved on, no one could process the moments of cash. So here are some things that happened during this hearing. Jeff. bezos just started eating nuts on his call. That was just a thing that you started snacking for the first ninety minutes. It appears that basis had tech issues was operating in some kind of delay. So we didn't hear from him. They just answer any questions and they'd take a ten minute break Jeff. bezos could fix his computer. Amazing. Jim Jordan, who McKenna pointed out. On the show last week is always sort of chaos element. Try to talk over several members of Congress got yelled to put his mass back on floated. Just elaborate conspiracy theories. was when I say was chaos I. Don't know if there's any other way to describe it. I. Think that led a lot of people to think the hearing itself didn't accomplish its goals, but I think in many ways it did. But Kennedy you WanNa Kinda go through what the committee was trying to accomplish the themes they were pointed at in. How hearing played out, right. So okay. First off. Harkening back to last week I mentioned Jim. Jordan's mountain dew obsession. Definitely drink a handful those throughout the hearing I took notes in screen shots. So, I, called it. But regardless of their pores soda choices, there were a lot of lawmakers who definitely did their homework and I think that was really apparent throughout the entire hearing and when I look at. The picture that they tried to paint I think that became really clear in chairman Sicily's opening statements. So this is the guy who liked. And spearheaded the entire investigation from the beginning, and in those opening statements, he pointed out that yeah Apple Amazon Google facebook. There are different in a lot of ways and they exhibit anticompetitive behaviors potentially allegedly and a lot of different ways. But what they tried to pull together and was a story, and it's really hard to tell a story and five minute fragments. But what happened yesterday was Sicily. Ni, and a lot of the Democrats on the Committee wanted to point out that these companies they become bottlenecks for distribution whether that's information or just like APP stores marketplace's they control what gets distributed in how what was really key to the investigation was how? How they survey competitors. If you have so much control dominance over a market or a specific part of the tech industry, you have a lot of insight into your competitors and you can do a lot of dangerous things with that, and then lastly, after that dominance has gained, it's how they abuse it. Right? How they abuse it to make harder for small businesses in competitors and I think that's exactly what Cellini pointed out in the beginning and I think they did a poor job that storytelling throughout the process. But I think that's also our job. Right is to pull that evidence together and tell that story for them in a way that isn't like. Yes, no yelling at CEOS and like stopping them and I think by getting that in the evidentiary record doing all this questioning, I think they really did achieve their goal in the end. Yeah. I mean, I think the thing that happened sort of next to the hearing was that they released a bunch of documents from these one point, three, million documents of clutch. Over the past year, they released pretty targeted selection documents for every company showing some of this stuff, Casey, I wrote a story about. facebook. INSTAGRAM. My I'm going to frame this email or mark Zuckerberg. Literally one sentence, no period. The Andrew says I need to figure out. I'M GONNA buy instagram like I would love to just be in a place were sending that email like super casually like I got this thing to figure out and it's not like am I gonNa buy the model of the car. It's like instagram. I've been thinking of the text messages where so and so says that Mark Zuckerberg's didn't go destroy mode on instagram ever since they got that up. Case she this to Kevin and right that text was. Yes. Well, it was Kevin. System was talking to an investor and Kevin said to the investor. If we don't sell well, mark, go into destroy mode on us and the investor side probably. Of course, stray casual. So there's just a lot of documents and I think one of the functions of hearing was to get those documents into the official congressional record to make the CEO's account for them. That did not seem very successful to me. Is like a takeaway people should have from this hearing, right? No. I think a lot of people that go into these hearings are expecting like these big Gotcha moments and expecting like a lot of news and all this stuff. But it really, it wasn't oversight hearing. You know it wasn't. They didn't come. They came at this like in a report last earlier this week that they came out at as investigators. They didn't come at it to make a big show horse and pony show out of it, and yet I think the CEO's didn't. The record well enough to the extent that they could have. But there was definitely, I was expecting them to do a lot less evasion and I expected a lot less room probation with the documents, but it's just the process of a Congressional hearing. It's. It's hard to do that in a congressional hearing. But if you put those documents out there, you get the CEO's on the record a little bit who does excite this excites the FTC. J, and that's who can take this next and then it's also congress. You know they can't break up a tech company, but they can regulate going forward and it's those three key themes that I pointed out earlier that they could regulate. You know what I mean. They could legislate to forbid companies from surveying competitors and things like that, and that's where this goes. So the format of the hearing, every member and five minute chunks, it seemed very clear that the Democrats had some sort of coordinated evidentiary strategy, they would start and. And they would say, I, want to read this email to you. What did you mean by this email and then Jeff bezos would say something like I have. No idea is on works. I. Was real pattern that developed was basis really not doing or claiming he definitely knows claiming not really no way Wayne is under the thing they did or they would ask sooner Pichai about the very granular add deal google made by an ad product, and soon I, would say I'll get back to you, which is basically all responses. So the Democrats seemed like they were coordinated to move through their documents. The Republicans seem to be doing something else that also seem coordinated intentional, but what was their focus because that seemed clear split my takeaway from Jim Jordan who? We got into earlier, he he was interviewing. As if they were all Jack Dorsey. And as we talked about like, yeah, he invited Jack Dorsey to testify, but he doesn't sit on the antidote subcommittees. Anything. He says, it just doesn't matter. So it sounded to me as if he prepared questions Jack Dorsey and then it was like, oh, he's not coming I'll ask Tim Cook the same questions. Another completely crazy moment that happened just seen by and five minute chunks is that. Represented Sensenbrenner from Wisconsin Dear Sweet Wisconsin. Definitely. Asked Mark Zuckerberg why the Donald Junior was banned from twitter and mark. Zuckerberg was happening on twitter facebook and there was just like a moment of confused silence, and then he tried to move on and that just sort of floated by in the river of chaos to tell you how much chaos there was kneeling. When you started to tell that story, I thought you were going to tell the story about when Jim Jordan asked him cook if the famous one, thousand, nine, hundred, four, Apple Super Bowl, AD was actually about twenty twenty cancel culture, which is another thing that really happened. I think that's out of context. He didn't ask him. He said clearly, this is. That's definitely what Steve Jobs was thinking IBM is canceled culture and Apple's going to break it with hammer and Jeff. Bezos said that social media is a nuance destruction machine and all this crazy stuff from that. It was a wild will that that particular question when Jim Jordan asked, do you support the cancel culture mov, you could see the CEOS like. 'cause they went in order. He asks them all in order. So First Tim Cook just like basically muttered nothing. Here's like I don't. I support speech whatever. The iphone a keyboard like that was his answer. Sooner per child also, just like muttered, right? He's like Google has always supported free expression Zuckerberg like saw the opportunity and took it and the forces of liberalism I rising I, and then basis was like I cannot. I cannot do in like went for it, and that was just totally insane moment. But it also seems like the Republicans were intentional to try to create their own moments where they were yelling at CEOS about bias on platforms is obviously something cover a. At. You were paying a lot of attention that case you're paying a lot of attention to it. Do you think that was effective in creating because you know there's like a parallel conservative Universe Jim? Jordan was on Tucker. Carlson. Last night like was that effective or d think that the CEO's were able to sort of tamp down on interesting the Tucker Carlson pointed out that Google and other companies are all big donors to Jim Jordan another folks. So that is a weird side, but I think it was actually besides the moment where they mixed up twitter with facebook I. Think this was much more effective off. Off Topic yelling about technology than we usually see like are genuinely issues that like they are upset about that, they could point to largely around like cove nineteen misinformation and they could at least like pick those topics and stick to them rather than kind of asking vague questions about like, why is my phone listening to me? Well, they're definitely asked questions about why are my campaign emails getting filtered by G mail? Yes. I should. I should mention that they have really and they have all of these cases where they ask about extremely specific one off incidents that anyone who has used social media knows happens constantly. And, then turn them into a sinister pattern. But I think they managed to come off as sounding more like they understood what they were talking about the unusual. I think that was a real theme of the hearing, Casey. What did you think of this sort of bias side show that occurred? Well, I mean the the idea that conservative voices are being suppressed is foundational to the conservative movement and is behind the rise of conservative talk radio. It was behind the rise of Fox News. Now that social media exists, we have seen it in this new form, but it is sort of being presented as extra, sinister and worthy of. Some sort of legislative intervention what frustrates me about it is that much more than newspapers or or cable news like Mark Zuckerberg Dorsey. These people benefit hugely from having all possible voices on their platform. None of them is incentivized to drive conservatives off their platform. What they are incentivized to do is have rules that make the place safe and welcoming. So that people want to hang out there and so to the extent that there are issues on the platform, they've largely come because these platforms have rules. And you know you would think that a bunch of free marketeers would realize that the alternative to the system that they're so mad about would be creating a new system, but they don't seem at all interested in doing that. So I just sort of dismissed all of them as charlatans I actually thought it was interesting that the opposite track came up, which was the Stop Hey for profit campaign I kind of wasn't expecting that. The representative Raskin I believe asked facebook. Basically, why aren't you kicking more hate speech off. I forget who else asked like look is the point that you're so big. You don't care about advertiser boycotts I. Mean, you know it will here. Here is a fact that the number one complaint that facebook gets from its users, the thing that users. About. FACEBOOK is that it removes too much content and so if you're running the place, you do have to take these complaints seriously in a way. Right? It might not be you know that you shadow band conservative whatever that even means on social network in twenty twenty. But the fact that you're removing content is really upsetting people. So you can't dismiss that idea entirely, but I still don't feel like we're having that intellectually honest conversation about it. So this was definitely I feel like you can connect the you control distribution. We're GONNA show the abuses of power narrative. We got other. Democrats. With the you control distribution. You're banning conservatives right like I. Think what's Sensenbrenner Again, cups and conservatives are consumers to is that people don't realize that like fifty percent of the population in many ways. But facebook has like famous conservatives working its highest levels Kevin. We last week, we're talking about Kevin Roose keeps sharing the list. List of the most engaged content from crowd tangle. It's all conservative content, and that's so problematic for facebook that they're. They're pushing back with other metrics and graphs of their own, making the facts just aren't there, but it doesn't seem to be convincing. Brett Kevin is being asked to recuse himself from facebook case because he's like best friends with facebook I, AP I wrote a column almost two years ago. Now, arguing that conservatives were trying to redefine. Any conservative identified person having any unwanted outcome on a social network, right? So bias is your name was higher than mine in search results. Bias is used suggested that I follow a Democrat and not a Republican right, and if you take action on your policies that apply to everyone against me a conservative that is biased against conservatives, right. So and by the way I have to say this has been hugely successful because we've talked about it. How many minutes now and the longer that these discussions. Discussions. Go on. They just sort of refi people's minds. The idea that there really is a vast conspiracy to silence conservative speech because he's networks are so big millions of conservatives are having experiences like this every day, and now there is an ideology that is basically a religion for them to attach to, which is although Silicon Valley liberals are out to get. Reason I wanted to talk about the conservative side show, which in many ways was a circus is it feels like the notion that we should be punitive to the companies or mad at the company's. Bipartisan, right we were. We were not looking at a hearing where the Democrats were on the attack. Republicans are saying we love. Apple. We're looking at hearing where they were. Everyone was mad. There are a couple of exceptions to that. There were a couple of I think sensenbrenner and a few other folks were like look we want to be clear. Big is not bad. We just WANNA make sure we're not punishing you for your success, but you were like almost entirely, right? Yeah. I. Mean I. think that's it's important to. To capture that mood like Jeff Bezos Mark Zuckerberg, Tim, Cook soon. Darpa, try they usually get to finish whatever sentence they start saying. Right. They're not used to being interrupted. Their thoughts are usually like you know they get to live in complete sentences and people take them seriously here in five in intervals, they were interrupted almost every time they started speaking to be told that they were wrong that they were filibuster at one point Sicily said stop thinking is for the questions. We can just assume they're all good questions. They. Were getting yelled at and they're going yell that about a variety of things that were pretty specific. So you kind of in your kind of structure here. The first one was controlling distribution. What did you hear as a hearing went on the indicated to that? The committee had a case here? I think the apple's APP store is one thing you know charging thirty percent cuts on certain things is just controlling an APP store. It's the same thing with Amazon's marketplace. They can inherently in control what gets placed and what gets sold and you know if they want to play with search results on Amazon, they can do that, and then on facebook and Google, it's not just like products and software that's information. And it could be information when it's like Google. Google. Stealing yelps, texture views right in putting those in its little info boxes in search queries in facebook if facebook is just like an. Mation, distribution platform and. It can decide Algorithm Mickley. Knowingly. What people get to see this bution was very keen to the committee's hearing yesterday and they pointed out different aspects in which you know each company exhibited that kind of behavior. So the one that will you bring up apple? We wrote about this, say there's much emails. Apples document production is just one hundred and thirty pages of unrelated emails and whatever order see it's like scan through it. So there's a lot of little stories in there. There's one about right to repair and apple realizing it needed to repair. By watching PR people operate by reading their emails journalists. Very entertaining. They're like we had a break like here's our strategy. Here's we're GONNA. That's all in there. You can look at it, but there's a lot about the APP store itself and how they're going to use the mechanics of the APP store to control their platform, and it started at the beginning like the first emails in this production from twenty, ten there. From Phil, Schiller Steve Jobs saying, are we GONNA? Let Amazon Sell Books in the kindle store. Store, it felt like I saw an Amazon ad was hard to watch this hard to watch this ad where a person's reading a book on an iphone in the kindle APP in the pick up an android phone keep reading. He's like literally like it was hard to watch like Schiller's at home like pain what a customer is having an experience that good it really just. Heart and so he's like it was hard to watch. You fours Steve Jobs. They're like we gotta shut it down jobs is the bookstore will be the only bookstore on the APP. Store. That's the way it's going to be everyone's gotta used to it. We know that restricting payments will hurt other things, but that's what we're doing and they started there in two thousand ten and they pulled it out, and then that ladders up into everything that we've seen with, hey, ladders up into the analysis group showing up to. Apple, can pay them to say that there's independent study has revealed. Everybody has a thirty percent cut. It has landed up into Tim Cook, forwarding. He gets a letters from developers that are in this direction. It's like apples breaking my heart and he just like Ford's it. Tim, Cook forwards that email to filter credit eighty, just as thoughts like amazing like they are constantly thinking about the APP store as a mechanism of control for the platform in the leverage and other deals. So the other one was apple is this Amazon one which I have very mixed feelings on saying that this is bad or legal I'm curious for all of your thoughts famously. Did, not have the prime video APP on the Apple TV and all these other places apple, Amazon came to a deal. There's an entire presentation in this production like the slide deck of how the deal is going to work. Apple got to be the preferred seller of its own product. So third parties cancel. Apple. Products, Amazon pages, they got. They have a custom by flow. They've custom product pages, all the stuff in return. Amazon got a lower commission on the APP store and gets to Selatan products which no. No like you can rent a movie from the Amazon APP on the Apple TV, no one else gets to it in one world. This is just pure platform collision, right? Apple cut VIP deal for big companies because it wanted something and you could say this is legal in another world. It's like this is how deals work apple something valuable. Amazon s something valuable and they came to a conclusion wherever made more money and quite frankly the consumer experience platform has got better. How do you read that? Casey? That is good and fair analysis of it. I. Think I did read slightly more scandalous. Tones into it in part because apple would never acknowledge that some developers are more important to it than others even though if you assume that that's true, I think maybe one of the things that's frustrating about it is there is no transparency accountability around which developers get sweetheart deals is that once you hit a certain threshold of revenue will cut your price. Why couldn't they extend that deal to everyone right? Or is it just if we withhold something that seems particularly valuable, we can eventually drag you to the table. Table, which is sort of what seems like happened here. I think in all cases, what I'm always looking for is the accountability, right like and some sense of of equitable treatment of developers and I understand the guys are always going to get the best treatment, but it can that be publicly visible. Can it be acknowledged and there'd be routes for others to achieve that same level of success and treatment, and that I'll just seems missing here. Did you buy Tim Co? He said it twice. It was obviously A. Glimmer, of sympathy for all four CEOS. There is a lot of reporting that they had spent months preparing for this hearing like being grilled there, they'd hire outside law firms. They. Practiced they all clearly had soundbites memorized in none of them. Got To say him because it kept getting interrupted. Tim Cook had this one where he is like if we're the gatekeepers, the gates are open wider than ever. We've gone from five hundred. APPS to one point seven, he said like. A whole speech. and. The thing is there's fierce competition for developers. They don't like our store can do for android the windows. For xbox and PS. Four. Which I was like the idea that adobe is going to be like we don't want to be on the IPAD. Here's PS. Four Photoshop is insanity to me. I'm going to build a spreadsheet. APP. For the five. That's how frustrated with Tim Cook. To that ring. True to you I. Mean, there's no, it does not ring true. There is a, there is a duopoly. In the United States when it comes to smartphones, iphones have majority share in the United States and you can't say, well, you know there's there's a rogue fork of android in Malaysia that you could go develop for if you really wanted to and have that come across as a credible argument to Americans. Right it is. Natural for any monopolist to spend most of its time, arguing that it is much smaller and much less consequential as as you think it is and they're essentially always asking you to ignore what is in front of your face, which is that they are the giant. They are in control. What they say goes, and it doesn't matter which small businesses get hurt along the. The. Way I would point out that the contact and we're gonNA talk about earnings eventually. But the context for that is apple had its biggest third quarter ever this month, their revenues went up eleven percent year over year, they're making obviously making billions of dollars in their services revenue, which is a lot of the narrative around the APP stores increasing that services line. Also went up. I think it was thirteen billion. So you're right. They're very big in their earnings the day after the hearing did nothing. To reduce that impression. I want to switch to Amazon a little bit McKenna. You really focused Amazon was basis first time up there. They came at him a lot about marketplace. How did you think that went I think it went pretty good. I. Think. John Paul specifically was just like killer her questions with breakout star. Yeah. She was just like killer and she's the representative for. SEATTLE. So this is where Amazon is right. So she just like killed it and. And I think there were a couple of instances in the documents and in questioning yesterday that really pulled important things out there was like testimony from one bookseller who was like, yeah. We just can't sell a category of books and we don't know why Amazon doesn't let us do that just like testimony like that or even when it comes to like acquisitions, the ring acquisition especially, I wrote about that today through the documents and how. They said, this is for market position. This is a for technology, your talent or anything. We just bought this and that's something that base said again, yesterday he was just very clear. It's like, yeah, we do buy things market position, which is like so insane just here like the richest person in the world. But like, yeah, we're buying market position. It's just what happens. That's another one I have mixed feelings right, and by the way, people should read McKenna story because those documents have just a very funny breakdown like the pros and cons of buying. Buying ring in many of the cons like what if this turns into nest, which if you're just the verge cast listeners like it's just like the Keyword Bingo, but it's fine to say, we're buying market position like this isn't the best product out there, but it's the category of video. doorbells is not huge, right? So to by the the market leader in video doorbells is maybe the most rational use of the money. What is the problem that you think the committee was trying to show an address sense of we're just going to market position. Pointing out, they can just do whatever they want and how casual it is, and there really isn't. It's really funny to read an email like that, and we could buy it or we could just copy it or are. We could just watch. You know that was one of the emails that base from someone. Those are just three options you know and it's like just pick and choose you know. Pointed out like a lot. Just that email itself really pointed out just how easy it is for them. They used a lot of that time history to talk about copycat behaviors and to talk about just like you know buying up competitors and it just seeing that all in one little e mail having to do with the ring was like really i. think it was really kind of I opening and especially like useful for the committee. So Amazon got hit a lot for the data collection side of it of copying competitors. bezos did not seem to have great answers there. Right. So that's the. The thing they got in trouble with this. There is that Wall Street. Journal article from like April where employees were literally like, yeah. We dip into data and we use that to guide our own private label products and everybody was like Whoa and Amazon basins. Yesterday said, well, we do have a policy that bans that but giant pointed out yesterday. It's like, okay. So what's your enforcement look like you can have the policy, but like if you don't enforce it, then it's like meaningless. And then yesterday I. Think Paul was like, can you give me a yes or no answer? Do you dip into data and he's like I can't I can't give you. Yes or no, and we're just like we're looking into it. The story had anonymous sources. So that isn't very helpful to us. You know what I mean. So that was one of the main things and that Wall Street Journal article and I think it's the same kind of examples in the committee's documents. They point out specific examples like car trunk, organizers of all things. It's like weird little products like Amazon's like this is a little hot. Maybe we should do that. So I, I think. I, think they made a good case yesterday. Yesterday on that. Yeah. I mean bezos brought up that Wall Street Journal, Article himself twice, and he was like, well, your policy against it. But I can't guarantee never happened. Then there is a strange just didn't come across clear I. Think I know what the committee was trying to get at their like US aggregate seller data when there's only three sellers and then only to sellers? Yes, I. Think what they're getting at is when you're down to the aggregate data of two companies, you heard effectively looking at individual data. What is the problem? They're like the I get what you're doing. You're just reducing the denominator to get to one, but like it, why is that particular problem? Right? Well, none of these. Dipping into individual seller data and looking at aggregate data. That's not a legal. There is no law. This is all voluntary of Amazon. So they have a voluntary policy where like we can't do individual seller data, but they say nothing against aggregate and aggregate what you're getting at eight. Here you is. Does the same thing if it's just like some goofy little product they. They bring up pop stock. It's all the time before pop tops in a moment. Right? There's only like one pop. So company like you know pop soggy, it was kind of an innovative product. It's like well, if there's only two of them and use the aggregate data, you you you have everything you need to know you know about that product line looking aggregate. If that's what you decide to qualify as do you as you're looking through the other Amazon documents and other stuff. So anything jump out at you is something the committee was trying to prove or get at. The questioning seemed very focused on. Like are you using the state at a copy products? Are you buying things? You shouldn't buy. There's one question which I did not understand why came up about DMC. Take downs on twitch and Jeff as just had this look of panic in his eyes. He's like I don't know man I bought Wedge because my kids want to. Do something like that was like the side show stuff, but the real focus here, it just seemed like it was definitely in the marketplace, right? Amazon, everyone came at Amazon for the marketplace. That's what everybody knows him as like they have all these little sides. They got rain. They got Alexa Alexa was one thing too. That was kind of interesting. It's like. Are you buying things like ring to put Alexa into and dislike expand your like Titan Ism as like an Internet Internet connected home. Thing and make that more closed off and walled gardening. That was one thing. But no, it was just focusing on how much power they have to kind of change. What happens in the marketplace to kind of decide what companies in what products are able to come up on the first page of results. You know that's also something that they dug into Google and in something that one of those like themes that kind of ties everything together. We should say they all spend a lot of time talking about counterfeit goods, and why is it Amazon removed? Fake stuff from the platform and how much is it profiting off of you know selling pick rolexes? Is it surprising? The whole foods didn't show up at all they're. Like that is a really massive thing. Amazon owns that. Is it moving into a huge new product category? I think whole foods is not an online marketplace, which was the title of the hearing, not that that restricted anybody from doing anything except that, one of the things Amazon says is we have lots of competition from offline marketplaces, right? Brought up kroger a lot I mean, this is the case he's point. They all made. It seem like they were beset at any moment. They could be crushed by the likes of stop and Shop Right? Like I think the point though was really on the. Digital. Experience Consumers have and like I, don't know Ho-. Foods fits. Into that narrative, especially, because it is itself not dominant like they bought it because you needed to grow in their. Good at that at my question for you on the Amazon stuff was when you think about, we talk about two thirty a lot right like you and I in particular spent a lot time to thirty, which regulates with the platform can do with content. There's not really an equivalent of two thirty for goods on store. Right like there's some case is out there saying like you're liable for what what happens on your online store page, but Amazon doesn't have that like second order of like Messi nece around it that twitter and facebook to with two thirty, I. Mean, it gets invoked a lot for marketplace's, but it's way messier. Well, I just wanted to like this question at counterfeits question about ranking the store like they are even more free than any twitter is to to sort tweets algorithm. Algorithm clear to modern like it just their store. Do you think that they're like that Algorithm transparency? Your wire things ranked. Did you catch a sense that that's where the regulation is GonNa go. So much of the conversation around Amazon really felt like it was individuals sellers being wronged for reasons of Amazon being unresponsive or stealing. It's data. So I don't know it didn't. It didn't seem like a really big focus of the hearing, but it is a huge deal. Yeah. The, digital marketplace frame of this, which is where we have talked to. Cellini. That's where he's going right like facebook and Google very digital. They have like they don't do physical goods. Really. Apple is the APP store. It's all digital goods. Amazon is the one where it's. Front to a lot of physical things, and that is the only place where I can see this regulation needing to make some sort of like major meaningful distinction in I. Didn't see it in the hearing, but I was curious of you caught a glimmer of it. I'm not positive that they have to make a huge distinction there like depending on what they come up with because. So much of this is about their companies and whatever product they produced. The issue is more or less whether or not they're being surveilled and unfairly by targeted and crushed by that data surveillance. All right. We have gone for forty minutes. We should take a quick break. I said I wasn't going to go by company and it happens. So we should come back and talk with facebook Ango. We'll be right back. This is advertiser content. When I say utopia what comes to mind. Birds Chirping lush natural beauty dialed up and vibrant technicolor. Is it within reach. Your world world. World. explained. You are an essential part of the perfect social body. Every Body Matt Place. Everybody happy now while the peacock original series, brave new world takes place in a scientific futuristic utopia. A concept is nothing new Sir Thomas more. I introduced the theory five hundred years ago. But we keep looking for that community identity stability of aldous Huxley's Utopia and not finding it Americans are the unhappiest they've been in decades, and we're increasingly lonely whereas in a utopia. Everyone belongs to everyone else. In nineteen forty-three, the psychologist Abraham. maslow's developed a theory of Utopia. One that allows total self determination in basic terms. maslow's theory says that in Utopia, we decide for ourselves, what we need and how we're GONNA get it in Huxley's Utopia citizens always get what they want and don't want what they can't get. Sounds. Pretty good. Right. Then why can't we make it happen? For a Utopian Society the work we might need to disband some of the things we hold dearest marriage government privacy individualism even family. See for yourself. If a Utopian world is as perfect as it seems watch brave new world now streaming only on peacock. These are really difficult crazy stressful times, and if you're trying to sort of cope, it could be helpful to find something that gets beyond like doom scrolling and like obsessive worried. But digs into what is really going on underneath the surface, and that's what the weeds is all about I. Matthew Yglesias. Weeds podcast here on the box meeting podcast network. This is podcast for people who really want to understand the policy debates and policy issues that shaping our world. We've seen now more than ever like how relevant policy is to our actual lives, but so much in the news isn't focused on really understanding and explaining detail way if that sounds good to you, join us for the weeds, every Tuesday and Friday to find out what's going on why matters and what we can do about it. You could download the weeds on apple spotify or wherever else you get your podcasts. Tracy. When it comes to facebook I turn to you. FACEBOOK is patience consumer of startups as what we've learned. Yeah. But you said something to me yesterday was interesting, which is everyone else's problems are forward looking and it feels like facebook's problems are actually in the past break for people explain what you mean. Yeah. So when Congress is looking at any trust with respect to these four companies for three of them, it's It's sort of about the marketplaces that their operating right now with facebook, the question is much more about should we have allowed it to buy serum? Should we have allowed it to buy WHATSAPP and most of the antitrust conversation that was around facebook yesterday was all about that. What did Mark Zuckerberg know about Instagram, and when did he know it? We wrote a story based on some documents that the house released yesterday. In which facebook has clearly identified instagram as a competitor. In at least some ways and wants to go after it and knock it off the table, and so that's kind of where the focuses their facebook and Burke did get a lot of other questions yesterday, but it tended to be much more about content moderation and things that don't have a lot to do with antitrust. So there was weird section where they asked the face. Face Research APP in the novel, Vpn? Any kind of got lost well, explain what happened and I'm curious reactions. Yeah. So facebook has a bunch of nifty tech tools to figure out what's trending which APPs or the kids using, and so that can essentially have an early warning system if it needs to consider acquiring something or more likely in these days, go out clone it. and. So Zuckerberg was asked about the way that the company uses these systems and if they are anti competitive I, think you know traditional antitrust law probably would not say copying an APP feature is anti competitive, but could lobby written in the future about it shirt I. Think the one that caught me was I mean, this is what I'm. McKenna's points from earlier is like one of the themes here is, are you so dominant that you can collect data that's unfair and then use that to crush or killer competitors, and definitely bought the Inaba VPN to do it. That's true. Now, when I've asked executives at facebook about this, what they'll say is they don't get surprised anymore. When you have three point, one billion people using your apps around the world. You know what links they're sharing, you know what they're talking about. And so you're not going to need some kind of specialized tool to know that WHATSAPP is really taking off. Right. So they would argue that, yes, these tools were useful to them, but you know at their scale, they know what's popular now, which doesn't really seem like addresses, the problem is reached. The fact that we're so big that we're all knowing is maybe not the defense that they sometimes presented as so here's what I didn't get. I thought, Zuckerberg I want to the instagram. What's about who's issues, but on the facebook research front, the data front, they him about this APP facebook research, which you were giving to teens. They were deploying with an enterprise certificate that story broke apple revoke the certificate, and all of facebook's internal APPs went dark, and this is a scandal story after story about it, they went on for two days. So I can I, don't recall that APP? Just how he you know, he remembers the day that all facebook's internal APPS went down and people couldn't go to the cafeteria. I would agree I found that answer. Extremely, ed? Persuasive. that. Do you think that was like actually strategic for him to be like, I, don't know and then come back later and correct the record I do remember when that happened I. Mean. I really don't know I mean also you know during a six hour hearing, it's also possible that you just you get flustered or you miss here something or or something because. Yeah. As as you say, I'm sure he remembers the day that apple turned off their internal APPS I mean. Honestly. Seems like an opportunity to talk about apple's market power, and the fact that you know a day of work canceled at facebook because apple got mad. But I think most of the CEO's didn't go into yesterday a wanted to pick fights with each other. It was kind of sad that they didn't. I was Kinda hoping that Tim Cook take a shot at soccer burger. Point that the other two APP platforms I was expecting it. It was there. It was. There was all there. So cellini ended and he ended the whole meeting with closing statement. He said, some of these companies didn't get broken out. They all need to get regulated in the off too much power that some of them I. don't these breaking up apple. What sort of break. Right like. The division get sent into the corner thing about what it's done. Right. Does should spin out the finder team I've always wanted to. A clean is always that they want to. They want the APP store to be separate from the IPHONE. Basically, that's the thing I always hear. Can't break I. Think you can write some strong regulations but not playing you're on store, right. But like Elizabeth Warren's point was it's cleaner if it's two companies, but it's still a gigantic remedy that I don't think there's a lot of like like consumer or public opinion is going to walk into an Apple Cup I think you'll radio at marketplace. It seems very clear that we says some of them she broken up he is talking about facebook. I have a twenty percent conference level. He might be talking with Google and Youtube as well. But if he's going to say some of the need to get broken up like it's facebook, did you hear anything yesterday that supported that conclusion or Saudi stocks I? MEAN HE I don't remember which Republican it was, but he was like the Obama FTC looked at this and they said it was minding love. Obama. Right. Like. Why would we go back in time to relook at I? Mean, there is a belief and I mean. Somebody who thinks there could be a lot of benefit in instagram and WHATSAPP being different companies from facebook. And the reason you ask. So many questions about that acquisition as you're making the case that it never should have been approved in the first place, and so now you need to remedy it. So that was actually like the entire thrust of the argument against facebook yesterday. I think, you could probably make just as good a case that Amazon after spin out aws, but lawmakers chose not to make that case. Yeah. I think that also gets into. Politics of the acquisition of the time. To his credit is like nobody knew instagram would actually be a success like we made it a success. It didn't happen by itself. I, don't know if the lawmakers. By award, these guys said, but I don't know that he actually made that case very persuasively. and. Who knows I mean? That's like anything could have happened. Right? Cram could've stayed independent and rapidly grown and overtaken facebook like that's something that could have happened. It could have kind settled into a middle zone like snapchat or twitter seems more likely to me although I think probably would have been bigger than those two but. You're never going to know I mean it is true that facebook gave Mike and Kevin it instagram enormous resources. A lot of the reasons why Mike and Kevin sold was because running tiny startup that's blowing up is absolutely exhausting Mike. Krieger. was dragging his laptop all around San. Francisco. Because the servers were melting at all times of the day whenever Justin Bieber. Posted like the site stopped working and they really we need help. Finding a person who can quickly fix this? So we don't have to like that is the reason that they were entertaining these offers and wanted to sell it. So that is also thing that happened. Do you think that that same kind of argument or approach can apply to what's up? What's up basically did not come up yesterday and all the focus on Instagram, but that's the other one, right? Yeah, and we know weirdly a lot less about that acquisition I. Think it's because people in America just have so much less love for what's APP generally. That, it's never seemed as important. What happened to WHATSAPP as what happens to instagram even though WHATSAPP, is used, you know way more, it probably has way more engagement even than instagram does so I don't know why that didn't come up as often. We know there was a competitive bidding war for that as well. Goule. Wanted it as well. You know Mark Zuckerberg made them an offer, they can't refuse. Do you think everyday Google's we should've spent more money on what's whatsapp like this could have been solved. Should have, but Google has been placed under an ancient curse that prevents them from ever making the right decision about any social product. So it was doomed never to happen. It's fun looking through the documents and watching them casually say they should buy facebook dot com. Yeah, that. Point. That is how they talk like the window into these executives just casually being like we should just this thing or maybe not, or we should just copied ourselves and kill it before it gets any traction like it's repeated over and over again last facebook question. This one is like harder to parse because I. There's a chance, it's October is just joking around but. But. He's in many of these emails. He's like the thing about startups, as you can always buy them, which I think the committee thinks is a smoking gun, right? Like facebook's entire plan is to buy the competition to get the data from wherever they get it to say, oh, man, this apps popping, we just buy it and kill it before it competes with us. I. Think he actually said at one point. That's a joke. Yes, he did and I believe that you know it was two thousand, twelve, right? He was probably still in his mid twenties. At that point, the company was a lot smaller like people were joking around like there's more loose talk when companies are younger and I do think. It was it was part of that. I think the more interesting question becomes. Let's say facebook is telling the truth about everything. Let's say they thought it was going to be a successful acquisition, but they never knew it was gonna big as it became today and they invested in it and it got super big. Okay. Well, now, it's as big as it is. Should they be allowed to keep? Keep it or should they be forced to spend it out and if you're GONNA force them to spin it out. What's the argument that you'RE GONNA. Make about why one question that I have a lot is clearly the referral they're gonNa make, and it seems like if you don't have some other reason, we've heard hints that there's some other reason, the FTC scrutinize this that will eventually be revealed. But what you're saying is the antitrust standard at the time, the Consumer Hartman stand, which is still our standard. Says, you have to prove prices will go up both products for free. You're screwed. Right? There's nothing to review because you're not gonNA prove prove that free products are gonNA get more expensive. I think it's pretty unfair if you change the standard and you go back in time and say you missed that standard. So I think there has to be something else there. Well, what was the standard by which at and T. was broken up? Right? Like presumably at and T. didn't used to be that big, and then it just got really big and then they broke it up at least. That's the thumbnail understanding I have of that break-up. Well, yeah. But then reformed itself. Right. But because of lax antitrust regulation, right? Like it wasn't a naturally occurring phenomenon that all those APPS got back to the other or was that just sort of like inattention to capitalism It's like in the seventies and eighties. This is Tim moves book the cursive bigness in the seventies and eighties Robert Bork I can't talk about Robert on this podcast. Are we doing this right now. Robert was very influential judge Appellate Judge Federal Appellate? Judge. And basically moved the antitrust law to the consumer harm standard as part of a movement called and economics. A whole thing Robert. Bork. Mostly famous because he was not appointed. He was nominated Supreme Court by Reagan but they leaked video tape rental history, and then he didn't get nominated and that is where the expression getting bork's comes from. This is all true Netflix's still has to abide by videotape data privacy act is a whole. This is all true when facebook and Netflix had some partners, Nansen? Partnership. To. Automatically share your net flicks, watch history to facebook. They're like pending the change of this law which we are working on Robert Bork. He haunts us all. I'm sorry, I can't believe this much. Yeah I. think that's just like the law changed in the in the seventies and eighties, the standard change. The conversation right now is a very much about changing it back months and months ago, pre pandemic, we had an economist from I. Think it was Nyu Thomas Philippon came on the show, and he was like look you have this natural ab test going on in the world where the European Union when it formed was like, how do we get an economy like America's? So, we'll just take their competition policies pretty good, and at the same time we changed consumer harm standard. So everything you're seeing the EU is basically our old competition antitrust standard in. You can see how active they are in everything. Here's a new consumer welfare standard. Whether you believe, this is actually a functional Ab test given. The state of both governments is up for debate, but that was his point I thought. It was spare can say.
"big tech" Discussed on WSJ Tech News Briefing
"But it's definitely a major issue for the Republicans that said, the Democrats are not. particularly. Better. Dispose to the big tech companies right now and one of the probably alarming aspects of of all this for the companies is that Both donald trump and presumptive democratic nominee Joe Biden who don't seem to agree on much of anything are united in their antipathy towards big tech for for different reasons. But they both have said they WANNA clamp down on these companies. So that's ahead win. A lot of the questions that lawmakers were asking based on internal documents that we mentioned some of which have now been released I'm assuming you're team is going to be digging into those. What will you be looking for? The issues they were asking about by and large warrant more new. But some of those documents hadn't been made public before. So we've already written about. The revelations in there about facebook's dealings with Instagram, prior to its acquisition of that company in two, thousand and twelve, and in particular. Mark Zuckerberg's dealings with his counterpart. Ram. Some conversations inside facebook about that deal that certainly in retrospect seem to buttress the concerns of the lawmakers who say that deal was in large part about getting rid of a competitor as much as it was anything else. Obviously. FACEBOOK says that's way too simple and is something. You looks a certain way in hindsight that it didn't at the time, but it's pretty clear there also that they. Would prefer those documents not they've come out for for understandable reasons is the companies don't always say public what they say in private about these issues, and that disconnect is really the heart of the matter right now. So everybody I think is trying to understand better what the internal policies are, as well as the positions they stayed publicly. All right. We'll be watching for what you find our Global Jason Dean. Thanks. Thanks so much for joining us. Thanks revenue. That's it. For today's tech news briefing as always got more tech stories on our website wsj.com. So check us out there and it'd be like our show, please do rate and review us. It really does help our supervising producer is Christopher's inslee and Qatar Yokum is our executive producer. I'm Amanda. Llewellyn for the wall, Street Journal. Thanks for listening and have a great weekend..
"big tech" Discussed on WSJ Tech News Briefing
"So Uber Lift AIRBNB, those companies have have really struggled because their businesses are so built around people actually leaving their homes and you know hailing rides or staying in other people's houses. So there definitely are part of the tech industry that are suffering more than others. So like we mentioned, these reports are coming just a day after the CEO's of the big four companies appeared before Congress that was a hearing on the antitrust concerns. That lawmakers have they were really hammering on these companies for squelching competitor's, and they cited a lot of the Wall Street Journal's reporting by the way your team really broke a lot of those stories. Yeah. It was it was pretty remarkable to see to see just how often the journal's name came up in that. You know I think in particular recent reporting by. Dana Mattioli. A reporter. WHO COVERS AMAZON? Has Really dug into its competitive practices toward smaller. Companies Third Party sellers as they're known. That use, it's platform to to sell their wares. But that it also competes against with his own private label products, overall I think. I'm sure that the CEOS of the big four companies involved here were very glad that these events were sequenced the way they were and not the other way around because it would have been probably a lot harder for them, even to go through the five plus hours of testimony date if it were as the day after these remarkable earnings just underline. A lot of the concerns that some of the lawmakers had about just the enormous cloud. These companies have. Yeah, and looking forward. The reporting the hearings could that clout be endanger here? What are some of the headwinds we're seeing well will depend in part on whether that hearing turns out to have been a kind of a watershed moment. It certainly was an incredible spectacle. Whether, that translates into congressional action to clamp down on these companies in their power. Or? Leads to or feeds into action by the various groups. Including the Justice Department and the FTC State Attorneys General, etc, who have been doing their own investigations of of the big tech companies. If there is new legislation or regulatory action that has real teeth that could definitely effect these companies at the same time, the trends that were talking about don't seem likely to your stop anytime. In the foreseeable future, I mean the digitization of our lives and business. The way we go about things and due to our work is just going to continue and these companies are really well positioned for that, and what about politically, we saw that come up at the hearing a lot. Well, politically, these companies definitely face some headwinds. Clear from the hearing on Wednesday that. The concerns among conservatives have only grown about what they see as bias by the platforms. In the way that they handle speech on their platforms, the companies deny that and say that they they address everything in a nonpartisan way and that they're merely trying to maintain come civility and fight misinformation and that sort of thing..
"big tech" Discussed on WSJ Tech News Briefing
"Wsj.com and stay informed. I the of Facebook, Amazon Apple, and Google. When head to head with lawmakers in blockbuster antitrust hearing on. Capitol Hill. then. The committee released a trove of internal documents detailing how exactly they build their case against these companies. Yesterday on the heels of all that. Reported their second quarter earnings spoiler alert in a time when many other businesses are struggling to survive. Big Tech is still doing pretty well. Here to break down is our global tech editor Jason Dean Jason. It's been a week. Thank you for joining US my pleasure. So Jason Let's start with the latest news earnings. What are some of the highlights from yesterday's reports? Well. Three of the four companies who? Testified on Wednesday at just blockbuster numbers. Amazon had surging revenue and a profit that was a a record at a time when people weren't even sure. It would report any profit because it has spent so much money dealing with The logistics of the pandemic response in his warehouses. Apple's results also surpassed expectations facebook, which has not only been dealing with the consequences of the pandemic, but also with a series of controversies in an advertiser boycott also showed star strong growth in its business and you know Google was kind of. Of The outlier, it had its first decline in quarterly revenue from a year ago in the history of the business, but it was a slight decline and it's still perform better than analysts had expected and its stock even edged up afterwards. So all in all, it was a remarkable show of economic and business force by these big tech giant's what does that tell us about big tack? Are they a bellwether for how the rest of the tech industry is doing as a whole they really in a category of their own? In some ways they are, there are other companies that throughout tech that are that are experiencing similar gains. If you take cloud computing, for example, the remote work phenomenon has driven cloud computing growth, which was already, you know extremely strong in recent years. To New Heights in, that's benefiting other companies that. Were not. Mentioned so far including Microsoft, of course, as well as smaller companies like zoom, which does video conferencing software everybody now knows there are other companies in the tech industry that are also struggling particularly those that have. Been in the the the recent wave of giant startups in the sharing economy..
Big Tech companies report mixed earnings amid pandemic
"Big tech companies reported mixed quarterly earnings on Thursday. The staggering economic fallout caused by the pandemic reflected and reports from Amazon Facebook, along with Google's corporate parent alphabet. Which reported its first ever drop in quarterly revenue. Facebook's revenue growth. Apple delivered a surprising strong numbers with rising revenue and profit while Amazon benefited from stayed home e commerce sales
4 Big Tech Stocks Add $214 Billion in Market Value After Crushing Wall Street Estimates
"But the Big Four tech giants reported their results after the bell and they crushed it. Shares of Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Google parent alphabet all higher in after hours trading. Instead of falling as expected, apples revenue jumped 11% as people snapped up new iPhones, Ipads and Mac computers to stay connected during the pandemic. Apple announced a four for one stock split to make shares more affordable. Amazon reported profit that far exceeded analyst estimates and Facebook's second quarter revenue topped expectations. And daily active users jumped 12%. Google lost 8% in ad sales, but it nearly doubled its cloud sales. So look for a big tech rally When the market opens.
Taller people face higher risk of catching COVID-19, survey says
"Well, people who are over six feet tall are more than twice as likely to get diagnosed with corona virus. The results of a new survey reveals a global team of researchers including experts from the University of Manchester and Open University survey two, thousand people in the country, as well as the US that's in in Great Britain and here to determine whether they're personal attributes work in living practices might play a role in transmission. The results found that taller people are at a higher risk which researchers say suggest the contagion is spreading through the air because height would not be a factor if the virus was only contracted through droplets. The results of the in terms of associations between heightened diagnosis suggests downward droplet transmission is not the only transmission mechanism. An Aerosol transmission is possible. This has been suggested by other studies, but their method confirms through social. Those social distancing still important because transmission by droplets is still likely to occur. It does suggest that mask wary may be just as if not more effective in prevention, but also air purification in interior spaces should be further explored.
BREAKING: Herman Cain Dies Of Coronavirus At Age 74 in Atlanta
"A political consultant who worked for Herman? Cain on his twenty twelve presidential campaign is announcing that he has passed away. from. covid nineteen. That's breaking news here in Y'all I'm not confide. This is not. Confirmed other than through Ellen. And I'm Yup. nope. It's IT's confirmed folks. Herman Cain has died of the corona virus. age seventy four. In Republican presidential candidate in two thousand twelve. Herman Cain ran his platform very famously was the nine nine, nine tax reform plan. He had been Fox. News contributor and a newsmax contributor newsmax is confirming his death He was admitted to the hospital on July first two days after being. DIAGNOSED WITH COVA night teen. Ten Days Prior, he had been at the Rally for the President they they don't know where he got the virus. And Herman Cain has now. Passed away He was the President of Godfather's pizza. He. Rose through the ranks He joined coca. Cola. He worked for Pillsbury. He was regional vice president for Burger, King, which at the time Pillsbury owned and then he took over. Godfather's pizza turned around made it a profitable company. And his big issue is marketing. He became the chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City in Nineteen ninety-five He was in the position for twenty months in nineteen in two, thousand nine you'll recall the president renominated him for the Federal Reserve. Board? He ultimately withdrew his nomination. He dabbled in politics in one, thousand, nine, hundred sixty was an adviser to the Bob Dole Jack Kemp Campaign for President He ran for the Senate in two thousand four. He was defeated in the primary by Johnny Isaacson actually campaigned for him in two thousand four. Now he beat colon cancer it was stage four and two, thousand six he was diagnosed with it the and then from two, thousand, eight, two, thousand, seven, of course, he had the Herman Cain Show in Atlanta? On WSB, I was actually hired in two thousand eleven to replace Herman on WSB Because Herman had decided, he was going to run for president and he had been in the line to replace Neil Bortz they needed somebody to replace Herman as a result. So they hired me Herman off and ran for president. He at one point was the front runner for the Republican presidential nomination, and then he the ultimately lost the nomination and came back to radio has has wound down his career over time and. Herman Cain now dead he was a good man. Seventy four years old affected by coronavirus virus. Prayers for his family. And for for those who knew and loved and worked with Herman Cain God. Bless him.
Washington vs. Big Tech: Taking on the Trillion-Dollar Club
"Lawmakers came out swinging yesterday against Amazon Apple, Alphabet and facebook at an historic antitrust hearing held with CEOS, Jeff bezos, Tim Cook Sundar Pichai, and Mark Zuckerberg. Over remote Webcam, you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony you out to give his show incorrect. The Best of your knowledge information and belief. So help you God. Yes. Let the record, show the witnesses answered informative. Thank you, and you may remain seated members of the House Judiciary Committee's antitrust subcommittee used charged language like too much power, Anti Competitive Acquisition and emperors as they aired their concerns about those four giant platforms. Here's the subcommittee chairman. Democrat, Peterson, Selene, a Rhode Island, our founders would not bow before king, nor should we bow before the emperor's of the online economy and ranking member? Wisconsin's Jensen. Brenner. Pointing out. Political concerns about size does big tech have a bias serves our consumers to? The need the protection of the antitrust laws. Both sides of the aisle had their opportunity to highlight this core conflict between Washington and Silicon Valley that antitrust enforcement can fix whatever is challenging or concerning about big tech. The CEO's for their part. Say We haven't squashed the competition. Here's Pichai Cook and Zuckerberg competition drives US team. needs to better products, Noah choices and more choices for every customers have a lot of choices in their products space fierce competition companies like Samsung, G. while way in Google has built successful businesses with different approaches. We okay with that. Our goal is the best, not the most I recognize that there are concerns about the size and power of tech companies. Now, we're services are about connection. Our business model is advertising and we face intense competition in both Amazon's ECOMMERCE dominance sparked a few intense moments after CEO Jeff bezos. The richest man in the world with a personal fortune of about one hundred and eighty billion dollars didn't get a question until nearly two hours into the hearing apparently due to a tech glitch. But then the pressure was on basis was asked about undercutting diapers, dot com before buying it Amazon's counterfeit problem whether Alexa favors Amazon's own products, many times. He didn't have the answer I. Don't remember that at all. I remember is that we we we'd match competitive. I believe we follow diapers cog, and this is eleven years ago I. Think we do is offer to get you information if you. Get it to your office for you read that article, but I didn't remember that piece of that I apologize for that I don't know the specifics of that situation, and I would be happy to give back to your office with more information about that. These questions for Basil's and Amazon strike at the heart of the antitrust that had been building for years as these four companies that we use every day every single day grow and grow larger with a combined market. Market cap of about five trillion dollars. If they were their own stock exchange, they'd be the fourth largest in the world. Here's vice chair. Joanna goose to facebook's mark. Zuckerberg strikes me over the course of the last several years. FACEBOOK has used. It's market power to either purchase or replicate the competition and facebook facebook. MESSENGER WHATSAPP instagram are the most now downloaded APPs of the last decade your company. Sir, owns them all and we have a word for that words monopoly. My Take Away I. Don't know I. Don't know if you guys watched I thought some of it was fascinating. A couple of questions, not not a lot of great questions thought. There's a lot of some good answers, some not good answers, but I didn't think that there was a major takeaway that all of a sudden. You know Washington was Gonna come down hard on these companies and there was evidence that was presented. That was gonna GonNa, create that challenge. I thought the most challenging piece of of news out there. But I think we've seen it before was instagram and facebook in some of the emails back and forth. Did you ever use this very similar facebook camera product to threaten instagram's founder Kevin side-stream? Congresswoman I'm I'm not sure what you mean by threatened I. Think it was public that we were building a camera up at the at the time in a chat. You told, MR, science that facebook was quote developing our own photos strategy. So how we engage now, we'll also determine how much were partners versus competitors down the line instagram's founders seem to think that was a threat he confided confided in an investor at the time that he feared you would go. That you would go into quote destroy mode if he didn't sell instagram to you, one of respectfully disagree with the characterization. Really dug into the emails and didn't take them out of context I. Thought, you'd have a hard case to make. Yeah, I, mean. I thought on on the point with facebook is easy Riley points to the quite a few different lawmakers went off the Mark Zuckerberg on on the topic of their competition practices whether he considered some of those companies they've taken over I, walk up and Instagram as competitors at that point which knowledge that they had been, which kind of course, a bit of a stir. Has Been Engaged in purchasing competition I, in some cases, replicating competition in some cases eliminating your competition, would that be a fair statement? The space of people connecting with other people is a very large space and I would agree that there were different approaches we took to to addressing different parts of of that space, but it's all in service of building the best services. Likewise said that they had tried to copy some of the particular tools that other rivals whether they bought them or not use including. Of course, the stories feature snap, which I thought was quite interesting, but Geo Point, Andrew as to whether we we conclude from yesterday that significant action from no makers is imminent. Even if we go to a sweep at the next election, the market didn't take that conclusion on those times. Talks hit session highs during the hearing, but the interesting dichotomy which goes to the question. Of, how much we managed to watch I watched as much as I could apart from when fed chair Jay Powell speaking and I watch that instead, and you had one side of Washington of goes up pressuring these tech stocks. The other part saying that we're hit as long as it takes, we're not even thinking about thinking about thinking about raising rates and not allowed old. Not just the textbooks. And close at a pretty strong session yesterday can I? Can I just ask whoever buys a company? That's not a competitor I mean. News the idea that you would buy a competitor when. Merger has ever taken place among a company that does an entirely different area that you wouldn't consider a competitor. Watching. This yesterday was complete theater just like it often is with the these congressional hearings. At. The beginning, they were asking questions and not even letting them answer. So this was really about giving Congress people their time to have their six minutes to talk and to go through with some of these things, I didn't feel like learned a lot under yesterday. I couldn't take my eyes off it when I was watching it, but it was theater. Classic, you'll take the time comments from lawmakers when they get me on. So they wanted to I, totally agree on that, but I would say compared to say twenty eighteen when Mark Zuckerberg had to go to face, they'll make on his own. Better prepared than they had even if it was then making arguments rather than letting. The answer, their questions, they made better arguments. They brought up more pertinent facts whether that was is Amazon. Abusing small sellers on this. Platform. In two, thousand, thirteen, it was reported that you instructed Amazon employees to approach discussions with certain business partners, and I quote the way a Cheetah would pursue a sickly gazelle is the gazelle projects still in place and as Amazon pursue similar predatory campaigns in other parts of its business. I cannot. comment on that because I don't remember it. Is. Apple misusing the margins, it takes on on the APP store. Apple from increasing its commission to fifty percents we serve. We have never increase commissions in the store since the first day at operated in two thousand eight. From doing so is it? No, Sir I disagree strongly with that, there is a competition for developers just like there's a competition for customers. So I think they were getting it the crux of some of the issues. But as we I think all concluding I, it didn't spell imminent danger for the tech stocks just because of that air. Just one note though on the competitor. Comment there or issue that you were just discussing Becky, which is an interesting one. We often talk on the show about how being a monopoly unto. itself is not illegal, and you just commented that you can't buy from everybody wants to buy competitor. Interestingly, if you're deemed a monopoly which is not illegal, but you have that market power, it actually is illegal to buy a competitor, and so if you really go back and read mark, Brooks emails even. Even about the instagram transaction, he actually even doubled back on one of his emails because I. Think he realized that given the power that having that industry depending on how you define it that he had to rewrite the email later to suggest no, I'm not trying to do this. He was by the way thinking about this, even to two, thousand, ten, you can. Almost, if you look through emails, you can sort of see how tracking in his mind. The Way He's thinking about it. So yes, everybody always wants to buy. But Inter stands at the size and scale that these companies are. Now, it's very hard to do that actually. Hit His. Answer. was that the FTC had all the same information that they had at that point in the FTC Peruta
Lawmakers grill 4 Big Tech CEOs but don't land many blows
"Tech has its day before the House Judiciary antitrust subcommittee. Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos faced questions from lawmakers Wednesday about how his platform treat smaller retailers. There was some argument about Amazon copying gadgets. For example, his Moto's editor in chief, John Biggs, says Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was asked about his platforms really Kinship with smaller companies. I think the intimation there is that Facebook was basically running around two smaller companies offering to invest and then stealing their ideas. The leaders of Google and Apple also fielded a range of questions from the company's relationship with China to censorship concerns. Big says lawmakers were under a spotlight to it also shows you how one prepared a lot of lawmakers are when it comes to technology and as a as someone who thinks about technology all day long and twice on weekends. It's kind of frustrating
Tech CEOs face lawmaker questions about their market dominance
"And the big tech companies, Apple alphabet, Facebook and Amazon, the CEOs of Google, Facebook, Apple and Amazon. Withering, rapid fire questioning for more than five hours yesterday from lawmakers who accused there Cos. Of using their power to crush rivals and squash the competition. The company's touted the various ways they help small businesses grow and portrayed there Cos. As models of American
"big tech" Discussed on Axios Today
"Harris poll that measures public approval for companies. Hey Sarah Hey Nyla. So who is coming out at the top here? So the poll measures everything from trust to ethics vision in growth and Americans. Trust companies that are addressing the coronavirus whether they're manufacturing PP. E. Like three M or providing groceries like Publix, Kroger Americans love the pharmaceutical industry right now they're very happy with walgreens and CVS, and they're grateful for companies like Netflix and Disney that make their lives more fun when they're sitting at home and who are we seeing plummet? Who Do we not trust who social media companies NYLA have gone way down companies like twitter and facebook rank at the bottom of the list. Media Industry as a whole ranks, very low as well as the airline industry ranked very low. The other industry that's not doing so great is the utilities industry companies like comcast eighteen T in PG and E., and that makes a lot of sense because as people spend more time at home, of course, those Internet bills, those water bills and electric bills are going to go up Sarah any surprises here or do You feel like the pandemic has changed the way we are thinking about companies we trust I think the one is co rocks a cleaning company that was hardly mentioned. Last year in our poll is now the number one company on the list, and that's because corks represents cleaning represents getting rid of germs and those are the exact priorities of people in America right now, that are trying to stay away from the coronavirus. Sarah Fisher covers media for axios. Thanks Sarah, thanks NYLA. Work from home for some people is turning into work from anywhere and think about this maybe your work from anywhere could be Barbados. Erica Panzi has been reporting on this. So you and I are working from the drudgery of Washington, DC and New York City please tell me how I could get to bar Betas. If you make a certain amount of money, think it's fifty thousand dollars and you have health insurance and you're willing to pay two thousand dollars per person or three thousand per family common work from the beach freer. They're welcoming people from all over the world. Apparently, it's taken off particularly in the UK, the US and Canada on who wouldn't want to take advantage of this time pandemic when our physical presence isn't required anywhere and then just go be in a Cabana. He would still have to work from the Cabana but yes, as someone who has island routes I, love the idea of working next to the beach. But Erica this is also really about the idea that people really can work from anywhere. We've been calling it work from home, but remote work really is worked from anywhere. Barbados is maybe the most extreme example I've seen, but we've seen. Plenty of examples of people saying I'm GonNa rent a place by the lake in. North Carolina and just stay there for a year with my family. People have moved back in with their parents if they're younger workers. So it really isn't about work from your home. It's worked from any home anywhere in the world. Erica Pandy covers the future of work for us at axios thinks Erika thanks Nyla. Before we leave you today I have good news because one of my childhood favorites is coming back right now. Fuzzy here with big news tomorrow Disney plus premiering a brand new show called muppets now. It. Won't just be fuzzy his best friend, Kermit the frog Miss Piggy, the sweetest shop.
The Biggest Takeaways From the Big-Tech Antitrust Hearing
"Gatekeepers the digital economy these platforms enjoy the power to pick winners and losers to shakedown small businesses and enrich themselves while choking off competitors their ability to dictate terms. Call the shots up. End Entire sectors and inspire fear represent the powers of a private government. Our founders would not bow before king nor should we bow before the emperor's of the online economy. That's the chairman of the House. Antitrust Subcommittee Congressman David Cellini kicking off yesterday's hearing with four of the world's most powerful tech. Ceos Amazon's Jeff Bezos Alphabet Center Pichai. Apple's Tim Cook. And facebook's Mark Zuckerberg all videoed into to address lawmakers concerns. Their companies are too big and that they're squashing the competition. Here's our reporter. Brian Tracy with some of the biggest takeaways. From yesterday the biggest takeaway was just how hostile the questions were virtually the entire hearing and how they came from both sides of the Aisle Democrat and Republican. There were not a lot of breaks for the CEO's in terms of a friendly moment where a lawmaker thank them for the warehouse in their district for example it was. It was virtually all adversarial. A for these guys. The questioning was definitely choppier than we would normally expect for a congressional hearing there. Were also some odd moments. When the chairman of the committee asked the witnesses to swear in he said UN. Mute your microphones and raise your right hand which is not typically what you hear in a Congressional hearing. When they're standing in front of the cameras so yesterday's hearing was a big spectacle but Ryan says it's not the end of antitrust concerns for these companies this subcommittee will be issuing a report about whether the US antitrust. Laws need to be changed. We could also see in that report new evidence that the committees gathered. That didn't come out. Potentially if the committee wants to do that it'll be interesting to see whether Republicans and Democrats can agree on that report since there was some tension over changes to antitrust law. And keep in mind. There are also ongoing antitrust investigations of these firms by the Justice Department the Federal Trade Commission State's attorneys-general and over the coming months. We'll have to see how those play out. Investors seemed to be hopeful shares of tech companies rose more than one percent on Wednesday and the companies are expected to report quarterly earnings. Later this afternoon
Big Tech CEOs Testimony Before Congress
"Today was the day as I record these words the big tech CEO's are still testifying before Congress. So I'm going to have to do a summary of what I've seen just in the first couple of hours or so and leave some of the juicier question and answer back and forth for tomorrow. I up a note on the format that we've been seeing. Yes. All of the CEOS were testifying remotely. They were using Cisco Webex as the video conferencing tool and it seemed to work fairly well at least right until this very moment as I turned off the stream to go into the booth to record this, they took a ten minute recess because apparently one of the witnesses. was having an issue with their stream or feed, and I'm wondering if it might have been Jeff Bezos because at least thus far were almost an hour and a half into the testimony and he hadn't been asked a single question. Anyway back to the whole idea of testifying remotely if I were going to do one of those rate, my video call backgrounds reports. Bezos look like he was in some sort of executive boardroom, lots of tasteful Chomsky's behind him. Look like he was in a conference room at a high end law firm I couldn't tell what Zuckerberg was sitting in front of it looked like closed vertical blinds almost like I don't know some sort of like a bunker like if you're battening down your house for a Hurricane Tim, Cook was in front of some sort of tasteful plant trough though he was clearly working off an ipad pro. Let's start off with what the Fab four had to say in their opening statements. Amazon's Jeff bezos underscored Amazon's job creation, its investments in social causes and its role in supporting small and medium-sized businesses. And made the case that Hey Amazon is just a tiny competitor in a huge global market quote. The global retail market we compete in is strikingly large and extraordinarily competitive Amazon accounts for less than one percent of the thousand five, trillion dollar global retail market and less than four percent of retail in the US unlike industries that are winner take all there's room in retail for many winners for example. More than eighty retailers in the US. Alone earn over one billion dollars in annual revenue like any retailer we know that the success of our store depends entirely on customer satisfaction with their experience in our store every day Amazon competes against large established players like target Costco Kroger and of course, Walmart a company more than twice Amazon size, and while we have always focused on producing a great customer experience. For retail sales done primarily online sales initiated online are now in even larger Growth Area for other stores Walmart's online sales grew seventy four percent in the first quarter and customers are increasingly flocking disservices invented by other stores. Amazon still can't match at the scale of other large companies like curbside pickup and in store returns and quote alphabets. Soon, Darpa, Chai, said that Google also operates in a highly competitive. Market and that it's free products benefit the average American quote. A competitive digital ad marketplace gives publishers, advertisers, and therefore consumers an enormous amount of choice pichai stated, for example, competition and ads from twitter instagram comcast and others has helped lower online advertising costs by forty percent over the last ten years with these savings pass down to consumers through lower prices in areas like travel and real estate Google faces strong. For search queries for many businesses that are experts in those areas. Today's competitive landscape looks nothing like I. Did five years ago let alone twenty one years ago when Google launched its first product Google search people have more ways to search for information than ever before and quote. Tim Cook of Apple said that the APP store has opened the gate wider for software developers. Also, apple doesn't have dominant market share quote as much as we believe, the iphone provides the best user experience. We know it is far from the only choice available to consumers Cook said after beginning with five hundred APPs today the APP store hosts more than one point seven, million, only sixty of which are apple software. Clearly, if apple is a gatekeeper, what we have done is open the gate wider we want to get every APP we can on the store, not keep them off and quote. And facebook's mark. Zuckerberg said well, but he said a thousand times before that facebook knows it has more work to do on things like fighting misinformation and that you know companies aren't bad simply because they're big. And he took pains to point out that facebook is an American success story quote although people around the world use our products. FACEBOOK is a proudly American company. He said, we believe in Values Democracy Competition Inclusion and free expression that the American economy was built on many other tech companies share these values, but there's no guarantee our values will win out for example China. Is Building its own version of the Internet focused on very different ideas and they are exporting their vision to other countries as Congress and other stakeholders. Consider how antitrust laws support competition in the US. I believe it's important to maintain the core values of openness and fairness that have made America's digital economy, a force for empowerment and opportunity here and around the world and quote. In his opening remarks, the chairman of the Committee David. Sy-. Selena Rhode. Island. Laid out three areas of inquiry that the was scheduled to delve into at least in questioning from the Democratic Congress folk more on that in A. Quitting CNBC, each platform allegedly serves as a quote bottleneck for a key channel of distribution and quote the platforms allegedly used their control over digital infrastructure to Sir Vail other companies, their growth business activity, and whether they might pose a competitive threat and use that information to maintain their own power and third the platforms allegedly abused their control over current technologies to extend their power through tactics like self referencing their own products. Quote. Prior to the cove nineteen pandemic, these corporations already stood out as titans in our economy. Silly said in the wake of Covid nineteen however, they are likely to emerge stronger and more powerful than ever before, and he concluded by saying quote, our founders would not bow before a king nor should we bow before the emperor's of the online economy and quote? But as I say, while this was labelled as an anticompetitive antitrust inquiry, it seems like the Republican Congress folk were primarily interested in probing alleged bias against conservative users. In fact, Jim Jordan. One of the ranking Republican representatives spent most of his opening remarks railing against. which if that continues would basically be exactly what all of the CEOS in the talking head boxes would be hoping for right lots of distraction and no real spotlight on them. In fact, a lot of the most heated questions directed at a company that's not even present. We'll see if that continues but I have to say straight off Chairman Sicily and was very specific targeted sharp questions. He kept interrupting folks when they started to stray into doublespeak and the very nature of the questions from him and others at least so far. This wasn't like previous congressional hearings we've covered where the congress folk didn't seem to even understand the businesses they were investigating, and maybe that was because I don't know if you saw the woman sitting very prominently very obviously behind Mr. Cecil lean. Let me let the Washington Post fill you in on who that was quote as a twenty eight year old law student Lena Con penned a twenty four thousand word article for Yale Law Journal titled Amazon's antitrust. Paradox. The article described how US antitrust law isn't equipped to deal with tech giants such as Amazon. Even as the company has made itself as essential to commerce in the twenty first century in the way that railroads and telephone systems had in the previous century con now works as counsel for the antitrust subcommittee she has worked with Sylvain to develop his case against the tech giants including Amazon and quote. As I said, the questioning is continuing as I speak these words in fact I just heard that they came back from their recess. The whole thing did kick off hour late only getting started at one PM, eastern? So I don't think it'll be done before for five PM at least. So again, I'll put together a summary of all of the juicy exchanges happening now for tomorrow.
"big tech" Discussed on Post Reports
"They're going to take place on the campus of Disneyworld near Orlando Florida at what's called the ESPN. Wide World of Sports Complex. They're gonNA bring the top twenty two teams by record leaving out all the teams that really had no chance of competing. Those teams will play eight regular season games once they get through the quarantine process and onto this campus to play basketball, and then they will proceed through to the playoffs, and hopefully their goal is to begin games on July thirty first and crowned champion by mid October. So basically what they're trying to do here is just get to the end of the season and be able to declare a and even though they have to pretty drastically change what basketball will look like at least have a conclusion to the season. The NBA has crowned a champion single year since nineteen forty seven, and so there's obviously a major symbolic weight to not having a season that goes on finished at the same time. There's also major financial stakes here. Estimates of lost revenue exceed one billion dollars if they weren't able to bring some form of playoffs. Playoffs back. Obviously, it's the time of year when the most people are watching and you're getting. The most television revenue in the NBA realize is also that's probably going to be unlikely. Even going forward into next season that they're going to be able to have fans in attendance, so the idea was. How can they recoup? Some of this television revenue essentially turned their sport into a made for TV event where they would be able to at least get the cash registers going on that side. A while also tried to maintain a safe playing environment for players. So now that there is going to be this kind of modified reopening for the NBA you said that all these Games are going to be taking place at basically in ESPN complex at Disneyworld. Like what what is that all about? And why did they pick this idea of having everybody play in this one place in Orlando, well, the idea of the single site came about because you as we all know, travel risk just increases everyone's potential for exposure, so if you just eliminate all the travel and you're able to host games at basically the same venue or Or similar venues nearby you do significantly reduce the risk, which you can also do a sort of create a bubble, or what? The NBA is a campus. In other words, you can lock down. The players inside limit their contact to the outside world, and also limit outsiders coming into the bubble, and that should significantly reduce the possible exposure. Remember. We're talking about needing to put more than a thousand people into this campus environment. Once you add up all the players. The coaches trainers medical staffers front office executives and potentially media members as well so they needed. Needed some place. That was really big now. This campus happens to be I guess a good way to call. It would be sprawling. They're actually going to be able to host. Not only the NBA, but also major league soccer, their proposed summer tournament here almost simultaneously They've got plenty of onsite hotel accommodations, which is a big factor here, but ultimately I think it was the relationship with Disney. Who happens to own ESPN which is one of the NBA's major television partners that was able to kind of seal. This site as the preferred choice the. The biggest questions remaining right now though is okay, the bubble sounds great. In theory, it makes sense not to travel, but in the day to day life as you're trying to unfold eighty days worth of games potentially. How safe will it really be? What are the games themselves going to look like beyond the fact that there won't be fans in attendance and our players going to be able to stay safe and not be exposed to this virus. Because you can imagine, there would be another need to shut down if there was some sort of outbreak. It because thousand people is less than I don't know twenty thousand people on a stadium, but a thousand people is still a lot of people to be coming into contact with each other, and you have to think about the possibility that if one of them get sick at their teammates sick, all of a sudden, that could travel pretty fast in a closed environment. So how is testing playing into this? Are there any other preventative safety measures that that the NBA is considering right now? The basic framework of the safety plan as we know, it would be that players report to their. Their individual teams in their markets they would undergo sort of a quarantine period and testing at that point then they would all kind of travel, basically simultaneously to Orlando undergo another round of initial testing in screening, as well as entering into another quarantine period there, and then after that they're going to be getting regular temperature checks as I, understand it, and they're going to be undergoing regular testing as well. The hope that that they have is that. If one player test positive, they would be able to continue the event going forward, and just sort of have that player be isolated. For ten days to two two weeks as their symptoms recede, they don't want to be a nation where they have to immediately shut the whole thing down given the level of investment in time and everything else spread here could happen very quickly. Sometimes it takes a while to get the test results back. How many people are exposed before you understand there's a positive test. There's absolutely risk involved in. That's something that the commissioner has acknowledged to the players. Don't expect this to be a one hundred percent safe. We can't guarantee that listen. It's not an ideal situation where we're trying to find a way to our own normal. In the middle of a pandemic in the middle of sensually a recession or worse with forty, million unemployed, and now with enormous social unrest in the country, and so as as we work through these issues. I can understand how some players may feel that it's not for them. And how do players feel about this? Because as you mentioned? Obviously, they stand to gain money from being able to finish out part of their season, but at the same time they feel about the safety risks of doing this and also just the weirdness of playing games without anyone in the stance. It's a very complicated question. I think that the players understand that there. There won't be fans involved. We've evolved from that position. I think that the league gets it that this is a long term problem that could impact the bottom line next season, and so something is better than nothing from that standpoint, but I think that the players responses definitely mixed. I mean first of all they stand to recoup hundreds of. Of millions of dollars in salary if they are able to play complete the playoffs, so that's a major motivating factor for lots of players whether they're superstars, making tens of millions of dollars or role players who are making substantially less than that. I think there's also a sense that you wanNA finish what you've started, but there has been another group here over the last few days. That sort of risen up and. Whether the timing is right for this return whether basketball will become a distraction for the ongoing social rights and social justice protests that have been going on across the country, and that have often involved NBA star players whether it's Steph Curry Janas, Identity Kubo on Friday. There was a call among the players union that included the players Union President Chris. Paul and also Kyrie Irving one of. Of, the vice presidents where a number of grievances were aired about the potential impact of these playoffs and numerous players, even those players on contending teams like the Los Angeles Lakers in the Los. Angeles Clippers have spoken out to kind of paint. Basketball as distraction now, Stephen Jackson a former NBA player, who was close childhood friends George Floyd has called on the NBA players to take astounded. Because he thinks that it will slow the momentum. That's been building here over the last couple of weeks. Now at the time. That basketball is GONNA. Do One thing. Take the attention. Of, the task at hand right now what we find four none of these white owners have spoken up. None of them that are taking the stand. Yet in my post, the video when the seasons start a San what we should do, but they ain't doing the plan basketball angled, but make them money. and. Take the attention of what we find for where we margin for. As.
"big tech" Discussed on Post Reports
"That's pretty ironic. But. Why would they do that if they're making this big public display of solidarity, with Black Lives Matter Movement and basically saying we understand that there are problems with how this technology is being applied, and we don't release for now. We don't want to take part in those applications than why when they be actively lobbying against further regulation on this technology. We've seen this from tech companies on a variety of issues of. If you ask any big tech company, they'll say. We believe there should be federal privacy law. FACEBOOK says it believes there should be a federal privacy law, but when you dig into what they actually want that law of to look like it would actually be quite permissive to them and allow their existing business models, and the ones that they hope to have in the future to continue to to grow. Basically they don't WanNa give up any future potential upside and there is a lot. Lot of potential upside for Amazon's business, and for Microsoft's business in selling this technology in lots of different ways, not just a police forces, but also to other parts of the government to foreign governments I mean other countries like China of had no problem in bringing facial recognition to all sorts of different aspects of life, so I think what's happening is these companies are are trying to sort of have it both ways they wanna say they stand black lives matter in the US in this moment where that's what they feel, their customers want, but. But not closing off any opportunities for themselves to potentially sell the technology in the future. Are there other ways that they do still continue to have relationships with police departments or sell them technology? Yeah, there are lots of ways that Microsoft and Amazon worked with with police departments, selling them cloud services, and you know there's a range of government kind of functions as well right, so it's not just local police could be you know the Department of Defense. It could be homeland security. This is really just one very small part of the picture we also. Also know that the products that they create our giant data collectors that surveilled the lives of Americans, and lots of different ways, and sometimes they hand over that data, usually with court orders, for example like people's locations, and that's become another big part of policing as well in the United States in fact, the case of Jussie, smollet in Chicago Google got asked by the court to hand over like a years worth of data about his location and his content, g mail, and lots of other stuff as they. They worked out that case in court. So for tech companies that are trying to actually make a difference and actually supporting civil rights, not just doing something symbolic. What are steps that they could be taking? That would be more meaningful to people's experiences on the ground. This is the number one question that I was asking every civil rights group and Privacy Group that I could find last week as these announcements were kind of flowing through one after the other what they told me is they want to see big corporations support a complete moratorium on this technology like we've seen come forward and cities like San Francisco and Cambridge Massachusetts they think it's just too dangerous right now, and at a time when we're talking about other ways that the police should be either de funded or their technology, and their capabilities should be reduced. It's too dangerous to have any police forces. They argue have access to this stuff, so that's what they want to see. These tech companies do just say they're going to support laws that would restrict the ability of police forces anywhere in the US to use stack, which would of course then affect the business models of these much smaller, less well-known companies to sell this technology to. What do you think that says about how tech companies are approaching these complicated issues that have to do a lot with Sula rates? I think most of the time when tech companies have conversations about complicated technologies. They're very unwilling to at least acknowledge that there's a problem and what we got last week is three of the biggest tech companies all, but saying. Yeah, we've made something that's dangerous and I think that is a significant step forward for this conversation is a significant win by civil rights groups to at least get the acknowledgment that there are some challenges here, so we should at least pause for a little bit selling this. Another thing that happens last week. That significant is that typically when we talk about privacy in the United States, we tend to frame it in terms of Oh. That might be creepy. I mean Martine. We've talked about this before. The. Alexa archives and how creepy that felt, or we talk about how it might stifle free speech and what happened last week is the black lives matter? Movement was able to connect. Invasive digital surveillance technology was something much more direct with the policing of black and Brown people in the United States and I think that connection made it much more powerful than what the conversations on this have been like before..
"big tech" Discussed on Cory Doctorow's craphound.com » Podcast
"Locating people goes beyond buying an audience for an ad. Activists who want to reach people who care about their issues can use this feature to mobilize them in support of their causes. Queer people who don't know anyone who was out can find online communities to help them understand and develop their own identities. People living with chronic diseases can talk about their illnesses with others who share their problems. This precision is good for anyone who's got a view that's outside of the mainstream including people who have used that we don't agree with or causes. We oppose big tech can help you find people to cooperate with you on racist or sexist, harassment campaigns, or to foment hey, full political movements. A discourse requires participants. If you can't find anyone interested in discussing esoteric subject with you, you can't discuss it. Big Tech has radically altered our discourse by making it easy for people who want to talk about obscure subjects to find since enabling conversations that literally never could have happened otherwise. Sometimes, that's good, and sometimes it's terrible. It's absolutely different from any other time. Secrecy. Some conversations are risky. Talking about your queer sexuality, intolerant culture can get you ostracized or subject you to harassment violence, talking about your affinity for cannabis in a place where it isn't legal to consume can get. You fired or even imprisoned. The fact that many online conversations take place in private spaces mean that people can say things that they would otherwise keep to themselves for fear retribution. Not. All of these things are good. Being coproducing deceptive political ads can get you in trouble with an election regulator and also send supporters to your opponents, advertising that your business discriminates on the basis of race or gender or sexuality can get you boycotted are sued, but if you can find loopholes that allow you to target certain groups that agree with your agenda, you can win their business. Secrecy allows people to say both illegal and socially unacceptable things to people who agree with them, greatly reducing the consequences for such speech this why private speech is essential for social progress? And it's why private speech is beneficial to people fermenting hate and violence. We believe in private speech and fought for it for thirty years because we believe in its benefits, but we don't deny its costs. Combined with targeting secrecy allows for a very persuasive form discourse. Not just because you can commit immoral acts with impunity, but also because disfavored minorities can whisper ideas that are too dangerous to speak aloud. Lying and or being wrong. The concentration of the tech industry has produced a monoculture of answers for many people. Google is an Oracle, and it's answers. The top search results are definitive. There's a good reason for that. Google is almost always right type. How long is the Brooklyn Bridge into the search box and you'll get an answer that accords, both with wikipedia and its underlying source, the hundred sixty seven report of the new. York City Landmarks Preservation Commission. Sometimes though Google is tricked into lying by people who wanNA push falsehoods onto the rest of us by systematically google search ranking algorithm, a system bathed in secrecy and subjected to constant analysis by the search engine optimization industry. Bad actors can do change the top results.
"big tech" Discussed on WSJ Tech News Briefing
"Journal were currently in the most significant financial downturn in a century and yet many of the world's largest tech companies are still growing and still investing in research and development are tech columnist. Chris mims will join us to explain. How and why that is after these headlines. The trump administration is expected to set temporary limits on a visa program. That's often used by international tech workers. The popular program allows students from overseas to stay on. Their student visas to work for up to three years after graduation. The visas are often seen as a stepping stone to H. One B. visas which are commonly used for highly skilled tech workers the administration says the temporary restrictions are designed to protect American graduates looking for entry level work during the pandemic when the corona virus outbreak began some cities in China implemented a smartphone APP to help track the spread of the virus. Now some of those governments have announced that they plan to make that kind of health tracking permanent. Many residents has pushed back saying the state is trying to exploit the pandemic to expand China's already. Extensive surveillance network and SPACEX is completing its final preparations before launching two NASA astronauts into space on Wednesday to rendezvous with the International Space Station successful. The operation will push the US into a new era of commercial space exploration and it will be a huge achievement for SPACEX and Elon. Musk it's founder. After the break our columnist Chris mims will join us to explain. Why big tack is well equipped to survive and even thrive despite the economic downturn when the world is.
"big tech" Discussed on Slate's If Then
"If you can last Friday. Thank you very much Dan. The Rose Garden Major League baseball had just suspended season. Broadway theaters just closed their doors. The previous day had seen Wall Street's worst drought since Nineteen eighty-seven and Donald Trump for the first time appeared to be taking the corona virus. Seriously today I'd like to provide an update to the American people. On several decisive new actions were taken in very lying in bed. Listening to the press conference and trump was speaking. That's Mason marks. He's a lawyer who teaches at Gonzaga and he studies Health Law Technology and privacy so trump was standing in the Rose Garden of the White House and he was flanked by a group of CEOS from some of the largest retailers like Walmart and CVs and He was mentioning. How some of these retailers going to partner with the administration to offer drive through testing for the novel Corona Virus. The goal is for individuals to be able to drive up and be swabbed without having to leave your car but then he just mentioned Google kind of nonchalantly and that really caught my attention. So I I kinda like sat up in bed. I want to thank Google. Google is helping to develop website to determine whether test is warranted and to facilitate testing at a nearby convenient location. Now Mason was paying attention. He'd written last year for slate about Google partnership that gave the company access to fifty million health records. Google Mason argued then was working towards a quote unrivaled. Consumer Health Surveillance Empire Google. According to trump was going to create a website in which people could enter their symptoms and their medical information and it would direct them if necessary to the drive through testing. And I thought that was really strange as it turns out. Trump didn't have quite right. It was a company called verily part of Google's parent company Alphabet and they were working on something but not nearly at the scale that the president had implied tonight bouncing questions about the program. The president promised the American people. Country is being misinformed. I think it's fair as the country's been lied to about this when he said that everyone kind of made fun of him. They said trump had talked of this big thing. That wasn't actually happening. But that's not your take. No I think what trump announced is exactly what is happening. The program might not be as far along as he leads some people to believe or at least as much as some people interpreted his announcement but I think that his announcement is is very consistent with what is actually happening fairly set up a covert nineteen testing website for to Silicon Valley counties but Mason thinks this site will soon be America's go to platform for the Cova test and while Washington can use all the help it can get right now. He thinks this combination of Google and healthcare should make you think twice. Not only will they be running the corona virus testing and taking in data on people's symptoms and their medical histories and their age and their location but also the results. Mason sees this virus as an opportunity for Google to finally crack an industry. They've been trying to get into for over ten years and they're not alone today on the show but the covert nineteen pandemic reveals about big TEX ambitions for healthcare. Is this a way forward for our country's broken healthcare system or just another attempt by Silicon Valley to mind? Our personal lives for data. I'm Henry Bar INFOR Lizzie. O'leary this is what next. Td.
"big tech" Discussed on GeekWire - Geared Up
"I know that San Francisco is the epicenter of the housing crisis. But sometimes I kind of think of Seattle is the epicenter of real estate innovation. We've got redfin based here. Zillow's based here Smaller upstarts like lofty em and Fly Homes and. I'm just curious if all of this innovation in the real estate world and the accessibility of real estate data has had any impact on this bigger housing picture. That you've been looking at through this book I am. I should say I like Red Fin as a company. I've met Glen many times and he's a great guy and I've met Zillow many times. I think these companies are great and they're giving people new kinds of consumer choices. I don't think that they are innovating. Real estate in some way that is making the cost of your house cheaper. I think it probably gives you more options and makes you happier and whatever the economic pie matches people better to what they want. But I don't think it if it doesn't match you to ten million dollar home if you don't have ten million dollars right so yeah but I will say there's another company didn't mention which is the baby little start up and I have no idea whether they'll do bad or good or whatever but a company called lockable which is here and they are doing They're trying to the their factories actually in Vancouver Washington but We've done whether it's that company or a company like it making the actual building of a house or a building or unit much cheaper. That is something that I think could solve the problem. But it could be a major contributor. That'll cuts we talked about earlier. I think it could be a big high. I think policy is the biggest one. I've rarely say that but I think in housing. It's pretty true. I think that actually building the house or a building better and increasing the productivity which by the way it's very low productivity industry construction is a very low productivity and so there's a lot to gain their. It's not some like hyper efficient industry that somebody's just playing on the margins off like online advertising. Say so I am not optimistic about all these different real estate technology companies. That are trying to just make buying a little easier or or finding the perfect department. A little easier I. I'm not saying these companies won't do good. I'm just saying that they don't. I don't know that there's that much for them to gain. I don't know that there's that much I'm sure they could. I mean they might win. Market share numbers. Or something like that. But it doesn't mean they're making everyone so much better off but I do think that technology that attempts to change how we build has hopefully great potential and it's not because I'm in love with these companies. It's because as somebody who studies economics a lot I see. There's a lot to gain and when there's a lot to gain you think will the opportunity for innovation must be there. It's fascinating because you know I've gone to the city council meetings over up zoning and And seeing the different characters who show up and particularly in your book what I think is so fascinating about this is it is fundamentally a politics and policy question but it completely bucks the trends of economic politics that you would see anywhere else like you've got the fringy activists who show up at meetings in crazy outfits who are basically fighting for a form of free-market capitalism just build build and then you've got the you know lots of regulation heavy-handed rules the government kind of folks who are also tend to be wealthier whiter homeowners and you know it's just not conservative in and liberal in the way that anyone would think about any other issue. I'm just curious. Why do you think it is that housing policy in this issue? Just bucks all of this other political trends. That's a good question. I've certainly observed which you've observed which is there are no Republicans no Democrats in this in this issue not a one and and if you go to places like Texas and other places that are perceived to be generally are much more conservative. It's not like they don't have Nimby ism there. They're still just building in the next neighborhood and that's kind of a former NIMBY ISM too so like it's so much easier to build a skyscraper next to a single family home in Texas right so I think that for starters. A lot of this is generational if you go and look at these groups though it is not completely monolithically. Tro. They're generally younger on the pro housing. Let's build side and they're generally older on the. I would like to neighborhood character. Preserved neighborhood character. I'm worried about parking that side so that is right off the Bat. And you see that there's a generational component to it. I think also local government is not really that partisan it on any issue rick meaning that obviously there are things like policing I would say maybe taxes but even then I've seen conservative China pass taxes before if they're practical for their for their region so I think that local government is is never really that partisan and I think that people are also not nearly as ideological as they think they are at as Nimby Ism shows right you find out that conservatives are not as free market is they think they are and liberals are not as welcoming of affordable housing is. Is they think they are so? I think there's also like a kind of an inherent hypocrisy and all this. When we're when voting for president we project all these things on it partly because it can feel distant not for everyone but you know you could get along with a with the person who votes for different president on a lot of different issues but you. You still might not agree with the decision but you could. You could find some commonality on a great many things but I think in local government. You're kind of fighting over these very visceral things like. Where are we going to put the dump? Where is the high density housing GONNA go? What neighborhood is the freeway or go over like sanctioned tent city less totally so those those are issues that defy some philosophical ideological contract. They're very practical to people's lives. And so it kind of makes sense that they would not be suprapartisan. I find that the yes and my backyard. People have their own ideological diversity within them. Some of them are kind of Socialists. Who Want to build public housing and affordable housing allot? Some of them are kind of on the bill. Bill build deregulate everything. Most of them are somewhere in the middle where they're saying like we recognize. You need some amount of market rate housing. Because that's the predominant way we build housing in this country but if we can have lots more money to build affordable housing that's great too. I should also note the way we build. Affordable housing in America is not radically different than the way we build market rate housing so the regulatory framework for the to whether we like it or not is pretty well married. I just think that these issues not they aren't partisan by nature and people aren't as partisan as they think they are once you start asking them about these very practical questions of how their cities and regions work. When I'm out there talking to folks about these issues in a very progressive city like Seattle. These ideas are kind of in the background. And I'm just imagining. Let's say you know a a new homeowner who was able to fight it out in this market saved up a lot for a down payment. GotTa small home. There's a good school nearby. They love this community. They don't WanNa see it change but they also are very worried about climate change and homelessness and these issues that are married to the Housing Crisis. Based on your reporting what is the fundamental thought process that needs to to address this crisis That's a good question so when I first met. Sonia trousers who is this one of the main characters and she's runs this group called the SF Barrier Renters Federation or BARF SF. Barf great name and the First Time. I am as you alluded to earlier in the interview. She shows up to these meetings in leggings and white cowboy boots and says things like people don't like housing because it reminds them. They're gonNA die and you know she says all these kind of absurd not absurd but these very caustic things called Peter Thiel and Nazi the other day on twitter and that led to a whole exchange in my in my in my twitter feed when I met her. She said to me. I'm not even really that interested in passing some big housing policy. I don't think anything would fix this. I think would would fix this. Is We need like a sociological change. Where when somebody shows up at city council meeting and they go. I don't want to build that thing near me. They're regarded as fundamentally selfish as opposed to how they are. Now which is they're regarded as if not a steward of good taste sometime like quasi anti-capitalist right even if they're protecting their own value. What do you mean? Well that that they're stuck sticking it to the developer and you heard the mayor of Beverly Hills be like developers or bad hate developers. I mean I don't know how many developers live in Beverly Hills but I assume a good number of wealthy developers in L. A. V. Vaguely in that region. I can think of one I know personally who lives there so you already starting to see it to change. Just based necessity. Which is that young people who move to cities and see that? There is no place for them naturally. Go where am I gonNA live? That's near my job. Oh all that land is filled up. I want that land to change. I want those neighborhoods change. I think Sonia was saying is that people just have to accept that their region is GonNa Change and that they have to make space for other people if they're going to have a thriving region. I also think this is something I returned to a lot. So you go to a place at Palo Alto in the bay area which is Kind of somewhere between a college town in a and a suburb and company town. It's got all these different identities. And they have a ton of offices and they have affirmatively through their community process that they guard so tightly made possible. All those office buildings were all. Those jobs are now so Palo Alto now has about four jobs housing unit which is like almost twice as much as Manhattan. It's not as big as Manhattan but their land use pattern is twice as intense in terms of the number of people who there during the day versus at night and they've made those decisions to put a bunch of jobs there and I feel like it's kind of disingenuous to say like I don't want my neighborhood to change when the conditions for which it needs to change have been created all along the way if not precisely by you but by the same people who are trying to change it the same kinds of people you're elected officials who have paved the way for all those jobs and so I just think it's it seems dishonest to act like you didn't know what was going to happen when that office was built there were before we came in here to this room to into this lovely elaborate expensive recording studio that aleisha stadium before we do that you and I were talking about the apple spaceship I believe we were. I'm sure that even if your listeners haven't been to the spaceship although there's a lot of tourists there so a lot of people do just go to see it. You can Google image picture of at a great. Many people probably have apples. Josh Futuristic Campus Orders Flying saucer looking. I mean that's like the equivalent I've been there. It's not terribly tall. But that's like the equivalent of a major skyscraper in the middle of a relatively small city that built almost effectively no housing to accommodate this giant skyscraper effectively. There's a dishonesty to that. And when I say dishonesty it's not like I'm trying to vindictive or capture these people. They made that decision. That's a decision they made. And I think that you kind of have to live with those decisions. Since you're you're inviting all these people to come work at this company some of them moved from out of state some of them might your children's some of them come from wherever Other parts of the world. You've invited all those people that are through that and you. Kinda got a bill all the for them because it is a region some of those people would say. They want to look further from work closer to work. But you have to. You have to accept that that's decision you made. That decision is gonNA come with consequences fascinating stuff and there's so much more that we haven't gotten to that it's in the book. The book is called Golden Gate's fighting for housing in America which we will link to in the show notes connor dirty. Thank you so much for joining me today for having me palatial amazing recording city. I've pleasure I'm Monica Nicklesberg. Thanks for listening to Geekwire..
"big tech" Discussed on FT Tech Tonic
"You've just been appointed director of the new. Ucla Center for artificial intelligence. Can you tell us how did the Senate come about. And what are you aiming to do. Well will the. Ucla has been quite active in AI. and machine learning for many years and I think we wanted to have a vehicle where we could actually show to the world. What we're doing so about a year and a half ago? We had this idea of center that would house all of our activities under a I wish it previously in a little bit silos in different parts of the UCLA. Oh and bring them together under this one roof where we can bump into each other very easily but also invite other people to come. We thought that was a really great opportunity so we were very fortunate to have a building become free or floor building and holborn and now we had lovely building their kindly refurbished by UCLA. And it's great now when I came to your launch event a few weeks ago as struck by a number of the speakers. Talking about the multidisciplinary nature of what you're trying to do. And that's a didn't always used to be nestled in computer science departments in universities it was often linked to the philosophy or psychology departments. Why has it been captured as it were by the computer the DISCI- department and do you think it does need a broader context? Yes it does historically perhaps less so poorly because it's only within the last say ten ten years or so that the applications of machine learning ai become so pervasive that we're touching on aspects that affect all of us now so there are ethical sociological legit cool challenges and issues that to address. which simply weren't there when you're just using these tools? Only in a research context. The sad truth is on the interesting truth. Perhaps the we just don't know how to sell the even now. These are all just hunches guesses Anina we just going with whatever works so the still very much a role for you know people who exactly the neurosciences psychology etc people who have other viewpoints on how natural intelligence might actually the functioning so things are very interesting into play there and inspiration coming from those groups in the early days of AI. Win Competition was not particularly powerful. It was important to have input from people who could look at the more logical sides of things practice things which didn't require so much competition the more philosophical side of things so right now going forward you kind of get away from the fight that you need interdisciplinarity in this area is simply inescapable that these tools are affecting all of us. And what does that mean and the answer to these questions are not mathematical in nature at all so if you think about things like bias fan so ethics is not for us to decide what the correct solution would be over the correct measure as the greatest good for all or the individual. Whatever it would be we can implement whatever society? It in quotes asks us to do but we know the arbiters of the ethical considerations themselves will implement whatever people feel team is actually the right thing to do. Now you've been in this field as long time. Where do you personally think we're gonNA see the greatest impact of air? Well I think certainly things like self driving cars. That's going to be a major agia thing. I think it's going to be some interesting applications and things like agriculture things which are already quite heavily. Automated will become increasingly so thank automation summation in agricultural be almost not necessarily the way that one may think in the sense of traditional farming but maybe much more localized intensive farming coming close to city centers which will be automated within perhaps speak factories and these echina- vertical firms. Yeah things like that but the automation the farming there. I think that will could potentially arrange thing. I'll may be a very close connection with the supermarkets but I think that supply of food will probably be a big impact. I think it was of the delivery of goods will be another big thing. Currently we are for us to people delivering things for us. I think there's quite S- natural to think that quite seeing that will be automated either through things like drones Owns or some form of physical walking robot that might actually come to your house bringing various goods to you. L. Is hard to do actually quite frankly interacting in the physical world with robots. It sounds may be quite easy. Compared to some other apparently difficult a attacks like game playing like chess or something but actually robotics is pretty complex. Compared to game laying that you're partnering as you mentioned with some quite big industrial partners some big tech firms do you think universities can remain the leading edge of a or is it the private companies that have vast amounts of data huge amounts of cash and computing power. Who really are can do all the running in this field? Well I think the universities are at the moment still highly relevant loaded. The researchers comes out of the universities is still still very very high quality but the kinds of research that they are doing is a little bit different. So it's true that is very challenging now for university to do do some of the kinds of research. The industry giants are able to do which is very relevant sometimes for consumers so for example if you wanted to make a next generation speech recognition Asian system that may require data results completion results of which are not addressable in a standard university environments. But the people of the same right so it's worth bearing in mind. The people that are working the tech giant's law jly are the same people that were working or perhaps even currently work in academia as well so people actually are sometimes part time in university apptime in industry so I think there is a very good chance that the universe is. We'll continue to play a very leading role particularly when you think the we still very long way way. In my opinion from where would we like to be intense way and to get to that next stage. That won't necessarily just require throwing more money tons of computation and data NATO requires some creative thinking President Interdisciplinary Sciences. We mentioned before. But do you think it's a good thing that there is a free flow of academics and research between universities and private companies or is there a danger that universities just become captured by big tech. In fact we've seen in Carnegie Mellon University in America. Their whole robotics department was basically report out by Uber. Is there a danger. Would just stripping away the expertise from public sector. Yes there is this happened already in the UK say a good fraction of our leading researchers. Academics have actually already been scooped up. By the tech. Giant's it depends a little bit on your viewpoint right so you could say look success story. Some people might say that's the natural progression of research. One sits taken up by industry. Academia plays role and this over to industry take that foods. But there's another viewpoint of this which is the actually most of key developments which are required to be made shouldn't be kept in the hands. Oh a small number of for powerful companies and universities should be playing a good role still to democratize if you like these technologies and I think it's a little a bit of both the thing that's interesting about. The industry versus academia is not necessarily only just about the money. Owed the concerns about where the power is concentrating thing. But it's also it's an interesting point about how does the research guess you. Don was the aim of the research. So if you've got a project or problem that you really really care I strongly about in how you going to solve that this Dick on example at the Manhattan project and how you're going to build a bomb right in that and boom. You're going to take that money. And you can scatter rid across a whole bunch of researchers and hope the one or two of them these loan geniuses sitting there in their offices with one or two students might hit on something which sold a problem. That's one approach. Another approaches to concentrate your resources into a single place. Put everybody together and encouraged them anti she solve that problem. Now if you really really really care about something then probably the Manhattan sort of concentration style idea is the right way to go but the universities are much more on the scattering of the funding. At least historically so it is a question of resources to some extent but he's also a question of attitude had to focus on use those resources wisely on my feeling is the it's not just the UK but the way that university research is funded is kind of broken system. What ways it broken? Well let me just say the giants they come and they take our brightest academics people somehow thing these giants the full of some special magic or something. These people people don't grow on trees they grow in universities. Buy Lingerie so. They are plucked out of the universe's where they're overly busy with teaching administration is crazy. The the greatest academics we have in this country are incapable of really addressing the greatest challenges facing tons of research in the future because they simply not able to to do the job that they actually have spent the last twenty thirty years of their life. Trying to train phone. But you know with the universe is so cash-strapped and there was all about teaching syllabi administration and the job has changed so dramatically in academia the last twenty years the when they're offered the chance to go and work and say some tech giant is not just the money there Ebisawa the opportunity to finally crack on with a team of like minded town to people to actually address some of these very interesting problems. So that's really a funding funding issue in the sense that the funding is not used wisely at the moment. So I think I'd like to see more concentrated effort of the research funding. It's a massive differential in pay. He is your leading to between the university and the private sector as well as in their google and de minded just along the road from you at UC L. But being scooping up a lot of academics can a five lifetime the pave the prime minister. That's quite a big differential. It is but I don't think he's the only reason that people go to work that. What Elsa just before is the Academics by and large. They don't go into academia because they WANNA make money. It's a long long training process. The typical mindset of academic academic is. They liked their independence at the freedom. Most of them are very passionate about what they're doing. If they wanted to make money they would have done something else. You know many many years ago. But the sad realities the many of them in academia the moment don't have the time to do what they would really like to do the pop song of quite enough money to live the lifestyle. They would hope to have so when they're off the community to be free from that and then go work in industry if he's a very interesting research lab. That's good but I have to say that. I don't think think is necessarily the ideal solution from any academics. I think won't have to ask them. But my suspicion is that many of them would prefer to stay in academia because the core they love independence. And if you go and work even for cool tech giant's you're still told what to do not totally free person who can just just think of anything you want to. Do you have to do what your manager's asking you to do now in your part of North London there's an extraordinary mixture of different institutions and companies and matching. Imagine that you could. Ucla you've got declined. You have the Francis Crick Institute you have hope British Library in the Turing Institute which is housed. Neither you've got a whole bunch of V.. He sees you could a whole bunch of startups. Some people have said that this is the Palo Alto of Europe. Are we going to get this great knowledge quarter developing. Do you think that's right. I don't superpower alto but it's great very citing at UCLA. Wheels have some interest in the knowledge quarter. And I'm not sure what I'm allowed to say about it. But that's in the of great interest to us. No I think we've used the kings cross knowledge quarter as a major opportunity not just for UC album for the UK. Generally I think it is a very exciting. Area is no coincidence. No incidents that all of the tech giants are working around the area and I think he's a very exciting place both in terms of concentration of interest there but the divers list them as well as you mentioned. Crick Institute is very very exciting. The Turing Institute also super exciting. So I think that what I'd like to see more of the is innovation. I don't want just to think about the culprit sort of in the tech giant's ending the big research groups but will we need more of in the UK is the Innovation Shen from startup level. Getting to the point that it doesn't just become like a twenty thirty person company and get acquired by one of the tech giant's but as she is able to stand in his own two feet and become much more significant player in industry so maybe some ideal perspective would be some institutions like UC L..
"big tech" Discussed on WAFS Biz 1190
"Is this going to have an impact on the Chinese economy, anywhere and everywhere, you are is America, energy, independent, Bloomberg radio, the Bloomberg business, and bloombergradio dot com. Bloomberg the world is listening, ever wonder why wedding so expensive why Brexit about China. Did you know that in economics? Professor use his way musicals to industry. His lectures, the Bloomberg benchmark podcast about 'em, much more. Join hosts Dan moss Kate Smith and Scott lemon a Wiki jogging dive into the top stories that drives the global economy. Find it on the Bloomberg terminal dot com. Nineteen soundcloud and what have you perfect Brown's? He'll favorite podcast marketing focus every business day. We. Other sectors that you want to have more or less exposure to behind the engine of games. Today's Wall Street actually US market looks relatively safe from Bloomberg intelligence. Boomer McCarthy joins us right now. If you go Sweeney unleash you listen today. Business. There are lots of considerations when you travel like comfort and safety, the big question will, I steal the business news? I need isn't enough to convince us that growth is not going to roll over. Here's your answer journal, Venezuela story that affect the price of used to see those inflationary pressures as transit trade. Is that a function GDP growth Berg radio the Bloomberg business app and bloombergradio dot com. The world is listening. Big tech is bracing for sweeping.
"big tech" Discussed on Gadget Lab Podcast
"This is the podcast where we take you through the tech news of the week and break down the gadgets, apps and services that you need to know about. But it's really not just about gadgets. It's also about our relationship with them, and how they impact our lives or maybe about how technology could be used to Photoshop an image. That makes you look like accomplished athlete in order to get you into an elite university as part of a giant holiday mission scam. Have I right, right. That's exactly what Photoshop is for. And then later in the show, we'll have a very special guest. Katharina fake Catarina is a well known tech entrepreneur co founder of flicker, she's now a VC, and she's just launched a new podcast called should this exist. It's an original series from wait what in courts, it's a podcast about the ways in which technology is just butting right up against our humanity. We're very excited to talk to Katharina later on in the show about everything that's going on in big tech right now. And also how she really feels about photo sharing apps. But first, let's talk about the tech news of the week are L. Why don't you go first? Well, some of the news dominated the week is very bad on Sunday and airlines flight crashed just moments after taking off killing all one hundred fifty seven people on board. And this is tragic not just because it's a fatal crash, but because it's the second time in months, this particular kind of plane the Boeing seven thirty seven max. Has crashed unexpectedly last October. You may remember. There was similarly fatal crash out of Indonesia regulatory agencies in over fifty countries. Now have issued gardening orders for this type of giant citing safety concerns. The United States was among the last to join that ban. But finally, the FAA has followed suit in while he's planes are parked. Investigators are just trying to figure out what went wrong in both of these crashes ending. It's important to keep in mind that airplanes are increasingly software driven machines. So even take off and landing or now, automated processes in many planes, and so in determining what went wrong in these particular flights investigators aren't just looking at mechanical issues, but also like bugs in the code effectively. That's very complex and has has a lot of people quite scared. So in terms of what this means for you as a passenger, nobody is flying on these particular types of jets right now, also our colleague orient Marshall, did some good reporting on how m-. Any seven thirty seven max jets. There are out there and found that this isn't likely to cause much disruption in people's sort of regularly scheduled air travel. But I think it's a good sort of reminder that. These machines are complicated. And that's happens. It's really unfortunate too. That this is happening at a time when we're pretty much in a period of record safety levels around air travel air travel has become increasingly modernized mean planes are built with. So so many redundancies in case things go wrong. But in this case, it's really sad. Really sad story. In other news last Friday right around the time when last week's gadget lab podcast publishing. Senator Elizabeth Warren from Massachusetts published a blog post on medium calling for the break-up of three of the big tech companies. She called the Amazon Google and Facebook specifically she called him out for establishing anti-competitive practices in stifling innovation. She called for the de merging for lack of a better term of some of the key companies that these companies have acquired in recent years, and she talked about separating the companies from marketplace's and then later in an interview with the verge south by southwest Warren named apple as well as one of the offenders in her mind now there was some drama after that involving Warren placing ads on Facebook those ads were then removed. There was question as to why because the criticized Facebook, but it ended up being a policy violation they were restored. That's really not the big story here. The big stories that twenty twenty hopefuls are starting to call out big tech, more and more which. Reflects a kind of shift in attitude and how the US is perceiving..
"big tech" Discussed on Planet Money
"This message comes from NPR sponsor Comcast. Comcast values your time. That's why you can schedule to our appointment windows, including nights and weekends that way. You can spend more time doing what you love. Comcast working to make things. Simple easy. And awesome. Today's show is part three of what I have been calling the planet money antitrust trilogy. The show we much better. If you go back and listen to the first two episodes. If you do not here is the text that scrolls on the screen at the beginning of the movie. United States government used to us antitrust law a lot to protect small companies against big companies in the name of competition. Then there was a backlash led by judge named Robert Bork. He wrote a book called the antitrust paradox. That argued antitrust enforcement had gotten out of hand and the government needed to back off now in the past couple of years as a few tech companies have gotten very big and very powerful a backlash to the backlash has begun. My name is Lena Khan, and I'm an academic fellow Columbia law school in a senior fellow at the open markets institute. And you're a lawyer I'm a lawyer when Lena Khan was in law school two years ago. She wrote a paper for the law review. What was the title of the paper Amazon's antitrust paradox an allusion to that Bork book the antitrust paradox? Why did you choose that title? I was interested in exploring how Bork's approached antitrust had enabled Amazon's rise and the paradise. Talks with Amazon seemed to me that here we had a company that was amassing dominance in various markets. But our current approach to antitrust law was really keeping us blind. So that dominance, and so that to me seemed like an interesting tension or current approach to antitrust law. Bork's approach is known as consumer welfare, and the basic idea is low prices and lots of choices are good. If consumers are getting these things, then there's no antitrust problem and clearly Amazon has delivered low prices and lots of choices. So it hasn't run into much trouble with antitrust law in the United States, and yet Lena argued in this paper, there are things that Amazon has done that have been bad for competition. So her wonky article comes out, she hears from a few antitrust lawyers. Then her article gets mentioned in the New York Times that spurred kind of a new wave of interest. And so I just started receiving more and more emails somewhat modest about this, which I respect that. Tremendous amount. Even though it's not good for our story. What she is not saying is that this student law review article completely blew up. I mean, I know you didn't go on Ellen or whatever. But we're did you go. I got big. We know it got big Lena. Con learn that the rise of a few giant tech companies had made this very wonky thing antitrust policy, suddenly feel urgent and important to lots of ordinary people. Is it bad? These companies are so big are they assigned that the free market is failing us and competition is disappearing. Do we need to think about antitrust in a new way congressman wanted to meet with her the Washington Post in the Atlantic wanted to profiler CNBC NPR, and she joins me now to talk about how antitrust law handles Amazon. Lena, thank you for being with us. Good to be here. Let me first say Amazon is among NPR's corporate sponsors, right? We're going to have to talk about that. Hello and welcome to planet money. I'm Jacob Goldstein. I'm Kenny Malone today on the show, Amazon one of our corporate sponsors and Facebook, also corporate sponsor and Google. I think a corporate sponsor Nata corporates. Oh, okay. But all of this is kind of the point these three companies are suddenly everywhere, they have an incredible amount of money and power and Lena is part of this new wave of thinkers who are starting to say, maybe the rise of these giant tech companies is a sign that antitrust is broken, and we need to fix it. Support for this podcast and the following message. Come from work human the conference for HR and business leaders pioneered by global force accredited by Sherm HR, P A H RCI AT D And world at work work human brings together. Visionaries thought leaders and activists like George Clooney viola Davis Brunei Brown and Gena Davis to share the latest research and ideas about the most compelling workplace issues. Visit work human dot com. To learn more the world is complicated. And for many of us history class was a long time ago. That's where we come in. I'm rundown on rom Arab Bluey, and we're the host through line NPR's new history podcast every week. We'll dig into forgotten stories from the moments that shaped our world rely history. Like you've never heard it before. So the question for today's show is what if anything should we do about the big tech firms. I mean, actually that's a ridiculously large question. There's no way we could do that in a show. I mean, we're going to do a subset of that question. Right. We're going to focus specifically on competition and the free market and the role of the government we're going to focus on antitrust. So the question really is. Should we be using antitrust law in some way with respect to these big tech companies and the way we're going to do this? We're going to talk to two very smart people lawyers whose job is to answer questions like these. And we're going to ask them to big questions. One. Are we thinking about antitrust the right way, does this consumer welfare standards, still work and question to if you had all the antitrust power in the world. What would you do first up? Lena con-? Do you wanna title, we're gonna make you the ruler of antitrust in America? That's kind of antithetical to the spirit. Of antitrust. So you are you sort of respectfully declining. Wait a minute. I'm happy to play along with the. Is there a reason in particular to focus on big technology firms? So the reason I've been focusing on big technology companies is because I think some of the blind spots of the current antitrust approach are most significant in the context of these tech companies in part because in many instances, they're offering products or services that are nominally free. Right. We're paying data. And so that complicates how anti-trust looks at these issues think of Google and Facebook, you don't have to pay money to use those services. So the current antitrust approach consumer welfare standard, which focuses largely on price just isn't gonna work. Very well. Also, she says, there's just this fundamental nature of a few key tech sectors. They just tend to be winner-take-all. Everybody's gonna tend to end up using one search engine one social network everybody who wants to buy or sell online is going to wind up at the one online store with the most buyers and sellers. Can we talk about specific companies? Okay. What should we do about Amazon? Why think I we need to have investigations into Amazon's conduct. We have a very meager understanding of how the different parts of its businesses actually interlink and how it potentially uses data collected in Warren market to advantage itself in another market, and that sort of thing. And so I think as a first step more investigations more hearings just to understand what's happening. And that should then help inform what we should do. What about as a second step?
"big tech" Discussed on Techdirt
"Hello. And welcome to the tech podcast. I'm Mike mass Nic today, we are running another conference panel as podcast, but it's actually a little bit different than previous times. When we've run a panel in that. I'm not on this panel a few weeks back. We ran the panel that I was on the reboot conference in San Francisco in late September. But I actually thought that many of the other panels at that same conference were really interesting as well. And the kind folks at the Lincoln network who put on the conference agreed to let us run any of the other panels that they had as podcasts as well. I'm not sure yet of will run any more beyond today's. But we might we'll see. So for today's podcast. It's the panel that was officially titled what has big tech ever done for us. But was really think debate about whether or not we should be breaking up the big internet companies. The penalties. Health was moderated by the EFF's grin McSherry and the three panelists. Interesting enough for three people who I think I've frequently disagreed with on a variety of different tech policy, topics. But who I think all present interesting and thought provoking arguments here not that I necessarily agree with any of them. But still very interesting. The first voice that you'll hear after Koreans is Jeff man from the international center for law and economics who will argue that breaking up the big tech companies is a bad idea. And also that there's no evidence to support the idea that there's been any harm from these tech giants. The next voice is Matt Stoler from the open markets institute. Who basically argue is the exact opposite that the company should be broken up mainly because he believes that they are harming society. And then there's how singer who it could be argued sort of takes the middle approach. In that he believes there should be more regulatory scrutiny of these firms, but not to the point of breaking them up and his arguments because their current position is harming new innovators and new entrance into the market as I said, I'm not entirely sure that I fully agree with any of them. But it is a fun discussion. And we may do feature follow podcasts where I discuss them in my own views on all of this. I also think that this is a really important topic. That is only going to be discussed a lot more in the coming years. So I think this is actually good place to start for anyone who hasn't been thinking about these issues or even if you have been thinking about these issues just to sort of frame a lot of the debate. And where a lot of people are coming from now at times the debate does become a bit contentious, and I should note as Karen will say right at the beginning that to keep the debate and the panel on track the panelists all agreed that they're opening statements are. Limited to three minutes and their answers to questions are limited to two minutes. So occasionally, you will also hear the voice of the time. Keeper who I believe is Garrett Johnson from the Lincoln network jumping into tell them that their time is up. So if you hear that on the podcast, that's why separately while this panel was going on at the conference behind them on the giant screen. There was a live poll asking the audience if they were concerned about the power of big tech companies. So sometimes you'll hear the panelists referred to the results or the changing results of that live poll, and how it changes over time. So if you hear a couple of references to that. And that's why that is happening. And with that, let's go to the podcast again starting off with the moderator occur in McSherry followed in order by Jeff man, Matt Stoller and housing..