--- Log opened Thu Jun 06 00:00:48 2019
04:08 -!- TheDukh [~thedukh@66-38-50-114.pool.dsl.duo-county.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
06:21 -!- Dolemite [~scott@h69-131-146-18.cncrtn.dsl.dynamic.tds.net] has quit [Quit: patch reboot time]
06:28 -!- Dolemite [~scott@h69-131-146-18.cncrtn.dsl.dynamic.tds.net] has joined #se2600
06:28 -!- mode/#se2600 [+o Dolemite] by ChanServ
06:28 <@Dolemite> mr0ning, be0tches and h0ez!
06:29  * aestetix hugs Dolemite 
07:41 <@Dolemite> So the world has turned upside down.   I'm now debating with a "Republican" and taking the side that the government needs to stay out of regulating YouTube, while he thinks they should be, because "Free Speech," yet he has no problem standing up for cake bakers that refuse to bake cakes for gay weddings (which I also feel they have a right to refuse).
07:42 <@Dolemite> The veil is getting thinner and thinner each day
07:44 <@Corydon76> People don't think they need to be consistent.  It's all about how they feel.
07:45 <@Corydon76> But you see the same from the liberal ideologues, who feel that drugs should be legalized and guns banned.
07:47 < aestetix> funny this topic comies up
07:47 < aestetix> comes
07:47 < aestetix> I'm listening to the Joe Rogan podcast with David Pakman right now
07:48 < aestetix> And Pakman is making some fantastic points about the Youtube drama
07:48 < aestetix> (Pakman is a progressive democrat)
07:48 < aestetix> Dolemite: wait, is the "republican" saying Youtube *needs* to be regulated?
07:49 <@Corydon76> aestetix: I believe that's exactly what he was saying
07:49 < aestetix> isn't that the opposite of what a conservative would want?
07:49 <@Corydon76> Republican != conservative
07:50 < aestetix> Well.... Bush Jr called himself a conservative IIRC
07:50 < aestetix> And yet he ballooned the size of the government
07:50 <@Corydon76> And Reagan ballooned the deficit, while Clinton reduced it.
07:52 < aestetix> yep
07:52 <@Corydon76> The GOP has followed de Toqueville's warning that the people have realized they can vote themselves the treasury.
07:52 < aestetix> Corydon76: Clinton balanced the budget, IIRC
07:52 <@Corydon76> No, Clinton was well on the way to getting us to a balanced budget, but he never did.
07:52 <@Corydon76> Each year he was in office, the debt grew.
07:53 <@Corydon76> It's only by taking Social Security "off the books" that he got to a balanced budget
07:53 <@Corydon76> But that's kind of like saying that if you don't count California, Trump won the popular vote.
07:54 <@Dolemite> aestetix: Yes, he stating that the government needs to step in and regulate YouTube and force them to let Crowder stay on their platform and get ad revenue.
07:54 < aestetix> Dolemite: I'm torn on that, not because I think Youtube should be forced to let Crowder stay on, but because Youtube is really nontransparent about their policies
07:55 <@eryc> i think they should let crowder stay, he's amusing sometimes
07:55 <@eryc> they have him cleaning up his channel now to get remonetized
07:55 <@Corydon76> Dolemite: I don't even see how the courts could uphold such a regulation, assuming it ever got made.  A business is required to pay a private citizen a share of their revenue?
07:56 <@eryc> it's their product that agrees to pay
07:57 < aestetix> Oh I didn't read the last part of Dolemite's statement.
07:57 <@Corydon76> In exchange for keeping content on their platform that they want.
07:58 < aestetix> Forcing youtube to pay crowder for ad revenue..... yeah that's a bit of a stretch
07:58 <@Corydon76> If they don't want the content, they don't have to pay.
07:58 <@eryc> also the government getting involved would be anti-monopoly procedures
07:58 <@eryc> they won't take a side on a civil disagreement
07:58 <@Corydon76> There are multiple competitors to Youtube
07:58 <@eryc> which means youtube can be spun out
07:58 <@Corydon76> Just not competitors that will pay, AFAIK.
07:58 < aestetix> So what would be the equivalent here..... forcing a magazine to keep publishing an author, or forcing a news stand to keep stocking a newspaper?
07:59 <@Corydon76> Forcing a newspaper to keep a columnist on
07:59 <@eryc> it's more like forcing a music publisher to pay royalties for old albums they are distributing
07:59 <@Dolemite> forcing a company to keep an employee that continually harasses their coworkers
08:00 <@Corydon76> eryc: no, it's not, because Youtube is essentially suggesting that Crowder remove his content and go elsewhere
08:01 < aestetix> What about forcing a TV station to keep airing a specific program?
08:01 <@Dolemite> aestetix: But the old people really love Matlock
08:01 < aestetix> haha
08:01 <@Corydon76> aestetix: More like forcing a TV station to pay syndication fees for a specific program.
08:02 < aestetix> Corydon76: if you include the ad revenue part, then yes
08:02 <@eryc> more like the TV station is playing matlock and not paying for it anymore because they don't want to
08:02 <@Corydon76> The government *can* force a TV station to air specific content, but it cannot force the TV station to pay for it.
08:02 < aestetix> I mean, Youtube isn't going to demonetize someone if they have a ton of advertisers who are demanding to have their ads played on that channel
08:03 < aestetix> Corydon76: you mean like a nightly news update?
08:03 <@Corydon76> Advertisers rare specify where they want their ads to air.  More often, they place restrictions on where it CANNOT air.
08:03 <@Dolemite> and in terms of tv, the minimum number of viewers
08:03 <@Corydon76> But that's based upon the government owning the airwaves
08:04 <@eryc> i'm sure it's wildly specific
08:04 <@eryc> ad-tech is pretty advanced
08:04 <@Corydon76> The government *can't* do that to a cable channel
08:05 <@eryc> pretty sure cable has to air the emergency alerts too
08:05 < aestetix> So yeah. I have no issue with Youtube demonetizing all Crowder's stuff. Whether to totally deplatform him.... that I'm a bit more torn on.
08:05 <@Corydon76> eryc: Yes, but that's not "content".
08:06 <@Dolemite> "I want my ad played to white males over 30 that are living embodiments of Al Bundy."
08:06 < aestetix> Although if they are monetizing his stuff, and then they demonetize it, they should be transparent about why. But I'm not sure if that's something the government should enforce.
08:07 <@eryc> the thing is they'll still be playing ads on his content and making money from it
08:07 <@Corydon76> aestetix: that's a market argument.  The actors need information so they can change.
08:07 < aestetix> Corydon76: right
08:07 < aestetix> I mean honestly, there is a huge gap in the market right now. I'd love to see a Youtube competitor come along. A viable one.
08:07 <@Corydon76> eryc: but he can go elsewhere.  It's not a monopoly.
08:07 <@Dolemite> State Controlled Content - not just for your uterus, anymore!
08:08 < aestetix> heh
08:08 <@Dolemite> Now that I make that not-quite-joke, I really shouldn't be surprised
08:09 <@Corydon76> aestetix: you have something against Vimeo?
08:09 < aestetix> Corydon76: not at all.
08:09 <@Corydon76> How about DailyMotion?
08:10 <@eryc> do those sites pay content creators?
08:10 <@eryc> no
08:10 < aestetix> Corydon76: no. In fact, I hope both of those sites grow a lot as a result of this
08:10 <@Corydon76> eryc: https://vimeo.com/features/video-monetization
08:10 < PigBot> Monetize videos and build a video business with Vimeo (at vimeo.com) http://tinyurl.com/y2dx9hze
08:10 <@Dolemite> You know what does pay content creators?    Creating your own platform and keeping all of the ad revenue yourself.
08:11 <@Corydon76> https://faq.dailymotion.com/hc/en-us/articles/207338747-Earn-revenue-from-video-monetization
08:11 < PigBot> Earn revenue from video monetization – Dailymotion Help Center (at faq.dailymotion.com) http://tinyurl.com/yxh7blvz
08:11 <@Corydon76> eryc: eat your words?
08:11 < aestetix> So basically, the actual issue here is a discovery
08:11 < aestetix> Right now when most people want to watch a video, they go to youtube
08:12 < aestetix> And clearly, searching on youtube is not going to find stuff on vimeo
08:12 <@Corydon76> aestetix: so you're saying that content creators need to do a better job of advertising?
08:12 <@Dolemite> yes it does
08:12 < aestetix> although google video does search those sites
08:12 < aestetix> Corydon76: yes
08:12 < aestetix> But those other sites also have a brand issue
08:13 <@Corydon76> Gee, if only there was an online system for easily advertising content
08:13 <@Dolemite> oh, never mind, searching on youtube does only bring up youtube.
08:13 < aestetix> Corydon76: I think we're kind of agreeing here, though
08:14 <@Corydon76> Waaaah, I only want to be given free money; I don't want to have to drive users to my content.
08:14 < aestetix> hahah
08:14 <@eryc> that's why it's called a monopoly
08:14 <@Corydon76> It's not a monopoly.
08:15 < aestetix> I think you could make a better case for monopoly if Youtube were actively hostile to or attacking vimeo
08:15 <@Corydon76> Users have a choice in where they go to find videos.  If they choose Youtube, that's not an argument for monopoly power.
08:16 <@Dolemite> Corydon76: Your Waaahnalogy is pretty much what I've been rebutting to people in favor of regulation
08:16 <@Corydon76> The ONLY reason we regulate monopolies is that they have a habit of abusing their power, eventually harming consumers.  If consumers are not being harmed, then there is no cause for regulators to act.
08:16 <@Dolemite> Just because a market leader dwarfs their competition, it doesn't mean that they aren't anticompetitive.
08:17 <@Dolemite> So the pseudo-conservative need to make up their minds - are they for Capitalism or not?
08:17 < aestetix> Right. One of the reasons AT&T was broken up was because they actively physically sabatogued competitor hardware
08:17 <@Corydon76> Well, they sabotaged their networks by refusing interlinks.
08:18 < aestetix> That too
08:18 <@Corydon76> Because people wanted to access others who were on AT&T's network, they had no choice but to dump the competitor and add an AT&T line
08:19 <@Corydon76> Incidentally, MSN tried the same thing in the early days of the Internet.  But their consumers rebelled, and Microsoft failed in that strategy.
08:21 <@Corydon76> But the big no-no on AT&T is that they used their dominance in telecom to attempt to destroy competitors in other markets, by pricing them out of the market.  That's why they were broken up.
08:21 < aestetix> Sounds like Amazon
08:22 <@Corydon76> Yes, it does.
08:22 <@Corydon76> But the problem is that while AT&T subsequently raised their prices in those markets after they won monopoly power, Amazon has not, AFAIK.
08:23 <@eryc> so google paying more for ad placements and monetization isn't pricing out comptitors?
08:23 <@Corydon76> eryc: you're allowed to price out your competitors, as long as you don't turn around and jack up prices after you've driven competitors out of business.
08:24 <@eryc> so we should wait for the competitors to go out of business before doing anything
08:24 <@Corydon76> In a word, yes.
08:25 <@Corydon76> Because if they don't go out of business, that's just the market at work, seeking better efficiencies.  Monopolies are NOT ipso facto illegal.
08:25 <@Corydon76> It's only the *abuse* of monopoly power that is illegal.
08:25 <@eryc> says who
08:26 <@Corydon76> Says my Economics 100 professor in college.
08:26 <@eryc> my economics professor said the opposite
08:27 <@Corydon76> Given the lack of action on the part of regulators, as well as the courts overruling the attempt to break up Microsoft 20 years ago, I'd say that monopoly power isn't illegal
08:28 < xray> yeah that is a problem with economics experts. They tend to disagree a lot.
08:28 <@Corydon76> When we get into legal arguments about what is and is not illegal, a lot can change based upon the makeup of SCOTUS
08:29 <@eryc> didn't microsoft make a deal to backdoor windows in exchange for their monopoly
08:30 <@Corydon76> A lot of good that did them.  How's the Microsoft CE market for phones?
08:36 <@eryc> they have 80% of desktops and 95% of fortune 500 on azure
08:36 <@eryc> so pretty well i guess
08:48 <@eryc> https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1881/03/the-story-of-a-great-monopoly/306019/
08:48 < PigBot>  The Story of a Great Monopoly - The Atlantic  (at www.theatlantic.com) http://tinyurl.com/yxejypkq
08:48 <@eryc> When the oil producers, whom the Standard had cut off from all access to the world except through it, sought an exit through an out-of-the-way railroad and the Erie Canal, or down the Ohio River hundreds of miles to Huntingdon, thence by the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad to Richmond, and so to the sea, Mr. Vanderbilt lowered his rates to the Standard so that it could undersell any one who used these devious routes.
08:48 <@eryc> QUES. At what price compared with the market price?
08:48 <@eryc> ANS. Below the market price.
08:48 <@eryc> QUES. Always below the market price?
08:48 <@eryc> ANS. Always below it.
08:59 <@Evilpig> eryc: your econ professor is completely wrong, if monopolies are illegal then how does he account for natural monopolies over things like water / power ?
09:02 <@eryc> they aren't a monopoly because they don't control the rates they charge
09:02 <@eryc> https://energywatch-inc.com/regulated-vs-deregulated-electricity-markets/
09:02 < PigBot> Regulated vs. Deregulated Electricity Markets | EnergyWatch (at energywatch-inc.com) http://tinyurl.com/yxru7y62
09:04 <@Evilpig> comcast
09:05 <@Evilpig> natural cable monopoly due to cost of barrier to entry + all the legal shit they put in the way and they control the rates
09:05 <@Evilpig> that's why I was paying $200 a month for less than half the service that at&t just got me recently
09:06 <@eryc> didn't we just talk about the breakup of at&t
09:07 <@eryc> verizon has been pulling copper out when they install fios for a decade now
09:14 <@oddball> In the US, monopolies are illegal, except for specific things which are (at least in theory) heavily controlled by the government.
09:15 <@oddball> water, gas, and electricity have a shit ton of local government oversight.
09:15 < aestetix> and ISPs
09:16 <@oddball> And, at least in TN, cable TV providers have government sanctioned monopolies.  They negotiate with the counties for the ability to serve in those areas.  Unfortunately, Comcast has discovered that it's easier and cheaper to buy legislatures than to provide good service.
09:17 <@oddball> not ISPs.
09:21 <@Evilpig> that reminds me I need to call comcast today and see what shit they are gonna give me to move my business service to california.  lol
09:22 <@oddball> moving to cali?
09:22 <@Evilpig> nah
09:23 <@Evilpig> I'm still under contract with those assholes and I have my $85/mo at&t now
09:23 <@Evilpig> my dad has comcast and they tried to say he used 2.4TB last month so I figure if I can transfer my business service there since i still have to pay them it will work out better for him
09:24 <@Evilpig> I refuse to give them $900 to break my contract just to tell them to go fuck themselves
09:25 <@oddball> ah
09:46 <@Mirage> Evilpig: I'm sure they'll be more than happy to keep charging and claim they are providing services...just like they did when i moved out here.  Equipment had ben turned in and moved to an area they don't service at all (for 50+ miles), yet they were _somehow_ still "providing me services" and therefore billing me.
10:09 <@Evilpig> they provide service at my dad's
10:09 <@Evilpig> but not the same level of service as here
10:11 -!- crashcartpro [uid29931@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-yztcgojbrzlzcata] has joined #se2600
10:36 <@Shadow404> oddball: same thing happens here, but at least google is fighting their way in and Att provides some competition and now with 5G routers that will provide even more competition over landline providers
10:37 <@Shadow404> we will see some market shakeup from the 5G home inet service market
11:38 < aestetix> I withdraw my earlier statement on thinking Youtube demonetizing Crowder is fine, because apparently they haven't done this to others who have said some pretty awful things.
11:38 <@Mirage> Dolemite: mass migration from your old "crawlspace"?  https://www.nbcnews.com/news/weather/ladybug-swarm-detected-weather-radar-over-southern-california-n1014341
11:38 < PigBot> Ladybug swarm detected by weather radar over Southern California (at www.nbcnews.com) http://tinyurl.com/y4wn3do6
11:39 <@Dolemite> Mirage: My old basement/crawlspace has nothing on some of the buildings around here.   Japanese Beetle infestation is crazy in East TN.
12:34 -!- strages [uid11297@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-wqnsrkiyqlfccwcn] has joined #se2600
14:08 <@Dolemite> Time to go walk in the rain to my car
14:13 <@Shadow404> (sad trambone)
14:20 < aestetix> Dolemite: at least you got to take a shower
14:23 <@Shadow404> he missed his monthly hose down so this is the next best thing
14:24 <@Shadow404> hr was starting to get complaonts about the swarm of flies circling his desk
20:43 <@_NSAKEY>  /q oddball
21:04 -!- hobbes615 [~hobbes615@unaffiliated/hobbes615] has joined #se2600
21:07 < hobbes615> evening all
22:03 -!- strages [uid11297@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-wqnsrkiyqlfccwcn] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
22:05 <@Dagmar> y0
22:05 <@Dagmar> Damn Subnautica looks good on a decent card
23:14 -!- hobbes615 [~hobbes615@unaffiliated/hobbes615] has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
23:33 <@_NSAKEY> Regarding the monopoly conversation from earlier, this is what happened with Microsoft: https://time.com/3553242/microsoft-monopoly/
23:33 < PigBot> The Microsoft Monopoly Ruling Aftermath: Why Microsoft Didn't Split | Time (at time.com) http://tinyurl.com/y6lrlhwd
23:34 <@_NSAKEY> Jackson’s word was far from final. The case found its way to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which rejected Jackson’s remedy and accused him of unethical conduct after it was revealed he had private conversations with reporters about the trial while it was still ongoing.
23:34 <@_NSAKEY> Basically, he did interviews before issuing his final ruling, whereas if he had waited until after the trial it would have been fine.
23:36 <@_NSAKEY> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.#Appeal
23:36 < PigBot> United States v. Microsoft Corp. - Wikipedia (at en.wikipedia.org) http://tinyurl.com/q3zy79k
23:37 <@_NSAKEY> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Penfield_Jackson#Microsoft_case
23:37 < PigBot> Thomas Penfield Jackson - Wikipedia (at en.wikipedia.org) http://tinyurl.com/yyrt72hm
--- Log closed Fri Jun 07 00:00:49 2019