I don't want to belabour this analogy too much because it's already creaking... but even large landowners have to deal with rights-to-roam / access rights / public footpaths, etc.

When a corporation becomes too big, we regulate it. That's the only wan capitalism can work is by continually breaking up monopolies, at some point the control becomes too much and is harmful.

Your alternative for Epic is... what? Just sit and take it? Epic is the littleguy here, they have to act from a position of weakness. Apply are the $2tn behemoth and I would have hoped that they would have a bit more restraint. Tim Cook was sitting in congressional hearings just a few weeks ago - way to justify the invite.

30% is a big cut, maybe it can be justified but the point is Apple don't have to justify it because they control the whole thing. It's textbook monopoly. The "you can buy another phone" is not a realistic alternative.

That they have the power to do so much damage to third parties should be worrying to anybody, third party developers and end users.

Fairly clear that the banning of Unreal Engine from iOS was a pure pressure move that had nothing to do with the actual issue they're arguing about. Unreal Engine just happens to be made by the same company, but is completely distinct from the sales commission on Fortnite. If Apple are going to be the sole arbiter of the entire App Store, they are asking for regulation by acting like this.

Yes it's their walled garden, but eventually a garden can become so big and well used, that it's a public park.

I feel this is a statement that needs to be justified.

[Citation needed]

But... how? It changes the autopilot speed. Don't drop a tasty morsel like that and keep the important detail to yourself! Such a tease...

I has, though tbh I haven't played with it yet as I haven't learned any of the voice commands, and I haven't heard that it's particularly good. Have never thought far enough ahead (ie before driving) to look it up. I should investigate that...

It would be fine if there were just a few physical controls, it wouldn't take many. They went too far with the minimalism.

They vote it down because you're deliberately picking and choosing your graphs. Death counts lag weeks behind infections, and your graph only goes up to 25 July, and isn't complete for that period. And infections aren't exactly under control are they? They have been going up since mid-July. The graph you post will get worse, and if you let the virus run rampant by being 'brave' they will get *alot* worse.

So very good for using graphs. Now use *all* the graphs and actually think about the data.

Ach, bullshit. Heavy machinery needs to be designed well. I own a Model 3, and generally love it, but the insistence on touch screen stuff you fiddle with often, utterly suuuucks. I can't change the temperature of the car without hitting & dragging a little spot on a glass touch screen and then watching what temperature number it changes to. It's stupid.

Not required (or normal) in the UK to carry ID.

Every business could pull this, because she has to keep her phone charged if she's going to use it as a valid ticket. If it breaks, well then she doesnt' have a ticket anymore. There has to be some rules... some consequence for skipping a ticket.

There are a bunch of other options like pay by Oyster card or credit or debit card that don't need electricity, but she used a phone that was on the end of its power. And then managed to fail to turn up for court. The article she writes comes across as really entitled, it's hard to have much sympathy.

We don't generally carry ID in this country... but otherwise you are right. If you use your phone to validate your ticket then you have to make sure your device works throughout that journey. Else just use your goddamn card, which doesn't need power!

The credit card keeps some sort of token on it that they check with a NFC machine - which works obviously never needing power. Remember that this system is used by millions of commuters every day, it's not something that you are going to pick holes in that easily. If you use your phone, then you have to keep it working, which is fairly obviously something you should take on your own shoulders if you can't be bothered to use you actual card.

They talk big but in reality have very little power. They can't even come in your house without being invited. They can get a court order but they'd have to have some probably cause first like seeing you watching through the window, in which case you should probably have a licence...

I'm sure you can find lots of flaws in capitalism if you look. Personally I think I properly regulated and safety-netted capitalism is the best we have.

Centrally-planned economies don't work well because the bureaucrats can't have the foresight or capacity to react to the world around them. Highly nationalised industry gets more and more stuck because if you think regulatory capture is a problem in private industries, imagine starting out with the regulators already part of the same organisation.

At the same time - completely deregulated "the market solves all" is similarly hopeful fantasy. You end up with abusive monopolies all over the place. Private organisations striving for profit are pretty good at being efficient and constantly developing themselves. They are also good at polluting, abusing, destroying anything around them that is not helping their profit margin. The worst actors tend to be the most monetarily successful.

I tend to lean that a strongly regulated free market is the best of both worlds. We still need some things to be controlled centrally, infrastructure, utilities, healthcare for the most part (bite me!), because those things are vital for life and there are too many fringes of society to just throw it up for the 'market gods' to service adequately. The rest, you want the agility and efficiency of private organisations, as long as they abide by the rules, and behave.