The U.S. Chamber of Commerce gets ready to go after the anti-monopoly movement and its leader at the Federal Trade Commission. But the conservative-corporate coalition is now splintering.
I was out of commission for the big tech open thread -- still on the mend. But this give opportunity to raise a question I wish I could have at the time...
Re. your Q3: Is it really correct to say that there are *Democrats* putting pressure on big tech, or are the examples you cite (Khan, Kanter) just an anomaly of Joe Biden? I imagine this really matters for what to expect, as well as for the political parts of the strategy Khan ought to pursue.
Biden is an odd duck: (a) the consummate Dem pol, and yet (b) at this stage of his career, he doesn't need to care about personal political consequences, so he can act on principle. Hence the Afghanistan withdrawal and the Khan appointment. Unfortunately, this says nothing about Dems (or liberals) in general. (My short take is that, in general, big tech has bought them.)
And Khan is not even political, much less partisan. She is a smart, good-faith scholar (rare these days) -- I'm pretty sure she'd be just as happy to be appointed by a Republican as by a Democrat. In other words, is it really *Democrats* who have the ideas, or is it just Lina Khan, et. al.?
As for the common people -- in your words, the army... I think battered spouse syndrome is the right framework. I'd like to say more about this, but it belongs in the big tech thread.
Fantastic analysis...today's mafioso graduate from Ivy League law schools, write the laws, and defend the oligarchs. At least the FTC is fighting, even if no one but the kleptocracy and its defenders are paying attention.
"Jordan’s real fight is not with Khan, but with the populist faction in the GOP that does actually want to do something about big tech. His battle during the antitrust hearings was less with Democrats than with fellow Republican Ken Buck and Matt Gaetz, both of whom actually wanted to pass stronger antitrust laws."
RINOs like Jordan could be on thin ice like Eric Cantor and others who were primaried. Donor money didn't save him from tea party voters. Progressive democrats could learn something from the tea party about standing firm.
Jordan talks like a populist but his policies are typical corporatist-outsourcing-monopolist RINO. Republican voters were deceived by [corporate] libertarians within their party for years and they know it now. No trade rules results in outsourcing. No border rules results in illegal immigration and lower wages. No anti-trust rules results in monopolism instead of a free market. No banking rules means taxpayer bailouts and golden parachutes for Goldman Sachs.
The free market needs rules to keep it free (open and competitive) and to keep small business innovators from being squashed by monopoly corporations and monopoly governments seeking to eliminate competition. If the US government (FTC) doesn't enforce the rules someone else will, that's why Communist China rules Wallstreet and the corporate CEOs are afraid to say a word about it for fear of retribution. Delta airlines and Marriot were punished by the CCP. Instead of hiring an army of lobbyists and corrupt politicians to complain about it, they meekly complied with Communist dictates. Monopoly corporations control the US and world economy but they are in turn controlled by a monopoly government, which has one political party (Communist) and no alternative. The end result of [corporate] libertarian policies is no free market and no freedom.
I really love reading about disputes, fights among political factions, interests groups, their motives for acting in that manner. In general, things like what you wrote in this blog post. Would you mind sharing any books about this theme?
“It is only with the arrival of Chair Khan that decades of tradition has been throw out the window,” Wilson told Congressman Jim Jordan...
Hopefully the window is on the top floor overlooking a freeway. Corrupt "traditions" will be the flat and dried out roadkill, poked at by hungry libertarians, on the return to free market economics and a more resilient and prosperous economy.
While I don't know the details of the Salesforce 2FA, what's described is considered attribute-based authentication, where the attribute in this case is your geo-location. This would be effective in the instance, for example, where a criminal sends you a text (having acquired your login and password to a Salesforce property) and pretends to be that property and asks for your 2FA token, then inputs it to login as you. (This is an attack vector seen in the wild today.) As far as I know, Google Authenticator does not support this additional geo-location safeguard. So while I loathe Salesforce as much as the next person, there is also a valid technical reason for this I think.
Tip for monopoly. Have you looked into companies like Acxiom (https://www.acxiom.com/customer-data/). They operate behind the scenes for collecting customer data but I think has huge monopoly.
I mentioned to friend who is at the receiving end of the culture war fights, not to get discouraged , told her remember David and Goliath, and Matt you are a great example of this!
I was out of commission for the big tech open thread -- still on the mend. But this give opportunity to raise a question I wish I could have at the time...
Re. your Q3: Is it really correct to say that there are *Democrats* putting pressure on big tech, or are the examples you cite (Khan, Kanter) just an anomaly of Joe Biden? I imagine this really matters for what to expect, as well as for the political parts of the strategy Khan ought to pursue.
Biden is an odd duck: (a) the consummate Dem pol, and yet (b) at this stage of his career, he doesn't need to care about personal political consequences, so he can act on principle. Hence the Afghanistan withdrawal and the Khan appointment. Unfortunately, this says nothing about Dems (or liberals) in general. (My short take is that, in general, big tech has bought them.)
And Khan is not even political, much less partisan. She is a smart, good-faith scholar (rare these days) -- I'm pretty sure she'd be just as happy to be appointed by a Republican as by a Democrat. In other words, is it really *Democrats* who have the ideas, or is it just Lina Khan, et. al.?
As for the common people -- in your words, the army... I think battered spouse syndrome is the right framework. I'd like to say more about this, but it belongs in the big tech thread.
Fantastic analysis...today's mafioso graduate from Ivy League law schools, write the laws, and defend the oligarchs. At least the FTC is fighting, even if no one but the kleptocracy and its defenders are paying attention.
"Jordan’s real fight is not with Khan, but with the populist faction in the GOP that does actually want to do something about big tech. His battle during the antitrust hearings was less with Democrats than with fellow Republican Ken Buck and Matt Gaetz, both of whom actually wanted to pass stronger antitrust laws."
RINOs like Jordan could be on thin ice like Eric Cantor and others who were primaried. Donor money didn't save him from tea party voters. Progressive democrats could learn something from the tea party about standing firm.
Jordan talks like a populist but his policies are typical corporatist-outsourcing-monopolist RINO. Republican voters were deceived by [corporate] libertarians within their party for years and they know it now. No trade rules results in outsourcing. No border rules results in illegal immigration and lower wages. No anti-trust rules results in monopolism instead of a free market. No banking rules means taxpayer bailouts and golden parachutes for Goldman Sachs.
The free market needs rules to keep it free (open and competitive) and to keep small business innovators from being squashed by monopoly corporations and monopoly governments seeking to eliminate competition. If the US government (FTC) doesn't enforce the rules someone else will, that's why Communist China rules Wallstreet and the corporate CEOs are afraid to say a word about it for fear of retribution. Delta airlines and Marriot were punished by the CCP. Instead of hiring an army of lobbyists and corrupt politicians to complain about it, they meekly complied with Communist dictates. Monopoly corporations control the US and world economy but they are in turn controlled by a monopoly government, which has one political party (Communist) and no alternative. The end result of [corporate] libertarian policies is no free market and no freedom.
I really love reading about disputes, fights among political factions, interests groups, their motives for acting in that manner. In general, things like what you wrote in this blog post. Would you mind sharing any books about this theme?
Excellent post! - Am definitely getting my money's worth :D
Keep it up. Matt!
“It is only with the arrival of Chair Khan that decades of tradition has been throw out the window,” Wilson told Congressman Jim Jordan...
Hopefully the window is on the top floor overlooking a freeway. Corrupt "traditions" will be the flat and dried out roadkill, poked at by hungry libertarians, on the return to free market economics and a more resilient and prosperous economy.
How unsurprising!.. but Jim Cramer should keep his piehole shut.... Jon Stewart called him out on it in the 2008 crisis, https://youtu.be/8RkqzRs95Sc
While I don't know the details of the Salesforce 2FA, what's described is considered attribute-based authentication, where the attribute in this case is your geo-location. This would be effective in the instance, for example, where a criminal sends you a text (having acquired your login and password to a Salesforce property) and pretends to be that property and asks for your 2FA token, then inputs it to login as you. (This is an attack vector seen in the wild today.) As far as I know, Google Authenticator does not support this additional geo-location safeguard. So while I loathe Salesforce as much as the next person, there is also a valid technical reason for this I think.
Tip for monopoly. Have you looked into companies like Acxiom (https://www.acxiom.com/customer-data/). They operate behind the scenes for collecting customer data but I think has huge monopoly.
The more anti-Khan staffers quit the better. She can appoint replacements who will work with her rather than against her.
This is generally true. My bet is that the cops are quitting are mostly the cops we want to quit.
I mentioned to friend who is at the receiving end of the culture war fights, not to get discouraged , told her remember David and Goliath, and Matt you are a great example of this!
This is definitely one of the most unappreciated aspects of the Trump presidency!!
I guess insurance, banking, militarism and healthcare would warrant worry.
Wheeeee!