Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

There's a difference between having a monopoly and being the best product in the market.



I'm not sure, if you drive everyone else out the market then you are by elimination the best product in the market (since at that point you are the only product left).

Monopoly laws exist for a reason and hard experience and I'm of the opinion that a single large player having complete domination even if they also have technical superiority is something that probably should be broken up.


> I'm not sure, if you drive everyone else out the market then you are by elimination the best product in the market (since at that point you are the only product left).

I think this can be read in two ways:

1. You're the only product, therefore you're the best (and the worst too, at the same time I guess). In which case I want to point out you can be a monopoly without controlling 100% of the market. There are usually always smaller competitors around— you just happen to have a share large enough or the assets necessary to control what happens ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. De Beers, for example, was considered a monopoly when it controlled 90% of the world's diamond production.

2. You're the one that came on top in a market with other competitors. Therefore, you must be the best.

This is assuming the only way to eliminate players off the market is by being "better" than them, but that is sadly not the case. For example— in Mexico there's a monopoly over the telecommunications business, and part of the reason it happened and stayed that way was due to support from the federal government and political corruption. Microsoft has had monopolies over several software markets— not because they were "better", but because if a better product came to be, they'd either buy it or build one that was built-in to Windows. IE was pretty bad, in many ways worse than FF, but also came built-in.


Completely agree with both your points, you can also be a monopoly in a less direct form of corruption via regulatory capture, there are lots of ways for smart rich people in charge of massive companies to bend the system their way.

Democracy and a free press in theory should act as a retarding measure but somehow that’s gone off the rails more (or I’m more aware of it than I used to be and it’s always been that way), social media and the internet has changed the landscape, We have a sitting president screaming fake news at news where they have incontrovertible proof..often his own words from previous speeches and interviews.

The world has gone haywire and at a time when globally we need more unity to address the issues facing us as a global society the very bastions of that global society are getting beaten with a stick.

I wonder what the world is going to look like 2050, I’ll be 70 if I’m still around.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: