←back to thread

The thing about Europe: it's the actual land of the free now

(www.economist.com)
160 points cruzcampo | 6 comments | 11 Apr 25 08:04 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
palata ◴[11 Apr 25 08:15 UTC] No.43651526[source]▶
> There are few unicorns in Europe, alas, and too little innovation.

There is most definitely innovation in Europe. It just gets bought by the US, who is quick to forget where the technology came from.

As for unicorns and trillion dollars companies... some may say it's a feature, not a bug. It's great to claim to have free speech and competition, but when a few people own a few big monopolies and control the media, is it real? Regulations are not bad.

replies(6): >>43651631 #>>43651695 #>>43651698 #>>43651715 #>>43651764 #>>43653696 #
qsort ◴[11 Apr 25 08:46 UTC] No.43651715[source]▶
> As for unicorns and trillion dollars companies... some may say it's a feature, not a bug

Cope much?

As a European I'd rather not have half of our industries critically depend on AWS and Microsoft, especially now that the US has fully embraced governance by RNG. The choice isn't having or not having your own digital infrastructure, it's either having your own or having to depend on someone else.

replies(5): >>43651741 #>>43651758 #>>43651843 #>>43651893 #>>43651973 #
InsideOutSanta ◴[11 Apr 25 09:09 UTC] No.43651893[source]▶
>As a European I'd rather not have half of our industries critically depend on AWS and Microsoft

It seems to me that's a point in support of the idea that Unicorns are a problem and should not exist.

replies(1): >>43651915 #
huntertwo ◴[11 Apr 25 09:11 UTC] No.43651915[source]▶
What a free society that would be!
replies(3): >>43651971 #>>43651994 #>>43652134 #
exe34 ◴[11 Apr 25 09:22 UTC] No.43651994{3}[source]▶
Truly! imagine if international trade was controlled for the benefit of the people instead of a pump and dump operation for the oligarchy!
replies(1): >>43652127 #
1. huntertwo ◴[11 Apr 25 09:43 UTC] No.43652127{4}[source]▶
My mistake, I forgot you could either ban both unicorns and pump and dumps or ban neither! How could I be so dumb!
replies(2): >>43652152 #>>43652176 #
2. exe34 ◴[11 Apr 25 09:49 UTC] No.43652152[source]▶
What would a ban even look like in the US? who would enforce it? if it profits the republican party, then there's no government agency left to enforce laws against that.
replies(1): >>43652184 #
3. InsideOutSanta ◴[11 Apr 25 09:52 UTC] No.43652176[source]▶
I must point out that you introduced the word "ban." I did not. I don't even know what "banning Unicorns" means, or how that would work.

I said, "Unicorns are a problem and should not exist." I suspect that regulation that protects competition and the free market is a pretty effective way of preventing Unicorns from arising in the first place.

replies(1): >>43652219 #
4. huntertwo ◴[11 Apr 25 09:54 UTC] No.43652184[source]▶
The president has a meme coin I think we’re going to get a painful reminder of why we have so many financial laws soon.
5. huntertwo ◴[11 Apr 25 09:59 UTC] No.43652219[source]▶
That is my mistake - I misinterpreted.

In my mind, regulations preventing unicorns (I.e statups > 1B in valuation) would require restricting personal decisions on where to invest money based on size. Protecting competition or free markets IMO would not succeed in preventing unicorns but maybe there is a plan that could work.

replies(1): >>43652262 #
6. InsideOutSanta ◴[11 Apr 25 10:08 UTC] No.43652262{3}[source]▶
My understanding is that unicorns are typically so highly valued because investors believe they will be able to corner their market and achieve monopolistic control over it. This is often their long-term strategy: undercut the market, drive out or buy out competition, and eventually increase prices and enshittify service while continuing to buy or legally destroy any potential competition.

There are a lot of links in that chain that strong pro-competition regulation could break.