• @qfjp@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    161 year ago

    Is it more anti competitive than McDonald’s only selling McDonald’s burgers

    Yeah, it’s more like the next time you go to Wendy’s, McDonald’s will follow you and try to lock the doors before you go in.

    • @rchive@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -11 year ago

      No, not really. Google can’t do anything about my taking my Firefox browser and watching videos from somewhere else. There are countless other video streaming services.

      • @qfjp@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        51 year ago

        There are countless other video streaming services.

        There are government websites - including my state’s dmv - that exclusively use youtube. You’re being disingenuous when you’re saying you can just use another streaming service (and I don’t believe you don’t know it).

        • @rchive@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -21 year ago

          The efficient solution to that problem is governments using a different platform that’s actually neutral. The government has full control over where they host their videos. Using that as a reason to TRY (a likely long and drawn out process) to force Google to change its policies company-wide is silly.

          I’m not being disingenuous. I watch videos on a bunch of platforms. It’s easy.

          • @qfjp@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            The efficient solution to that problem is governments using a different platform that’s actually neutral.

            First time I’ve heard public services called efficient, but ok.

            I’m not being disingenuous. I watch videos on a bunch of platforms. It’s easy.

            We’re not talking about you here. You’re purposely ignoring the problem, and therefore being disingenuous.

            • @rchive@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              Public services aren’t efficient, but they can surely change themselves more efficiently than they can force a multi billion dollar company to change its ways.

              I’m surprised you’re not more worried about the government outsourcing its functions to a company you seem very suspicious of.

              If the government decided to have vital public meetings only in a private venue you have to be a member of or something, the proper fix is not to force the club to accept everyone, it’s to have the government stop having vital meetings in private places.

              I also don’t see a problem because everything of value these video streaming services offer is replaceable by one of the many other streaming services. The fact that YouTube is the biggest or most recognized does not change anything for me. The fact that there is some content that is only on YouTube doesn’t, either. That’s a normal thing that happens in an economy. Ford dealers only sell Ford cars, Coca Cola doesn’t sell Pepsi, etc.

              • @qfjp@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                Public services aren’t efficient, but they can surely change themselves more efficiently than they can force a multi billion dollar company to change its ways.

                [citation needed]

                I’m surprised you’re not more worried about the government outsourcing its functions to a company you seem very suspicious of.

                You’re the one talking about all the alternate video services you use. I just dont want a monopoly.

                If the government decided to have vital public meetings only in a private venue you have to be a member of or something, the proper fix is not to force the club to accept everyone, it’s to have the government stop having vital meetings in private places.

                wut. Not having meetings in private places literally is making sure the ‘place’ accepts everyone. Do you even read what you’re saying?

                I also don’t see a problem because everything of value these video streaming services offer is replaceable by one of the many other streaming services. The fact that YouTube is the biggest or most recognized does not change anything for me. The fact that there is some content that is only on YouTube doesn’t, either.

                Well, you totally missed the point then.

                • @rchive@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  I just dont want a monopoly.

                  There is no monopoly in video streaming. Not even close.

                  wut. Not having meetings in private places literally is making sure the ‘place’ accepts everyone. Do you even read what you’re saying?

                  You’re misreading what I wrote. If government unfairly has vital meetings at Private Club which not everyone has access to, the solution is not to force Private Club to accept everyone, it’s to not have meetings at Private Club and have them at City Hall or something instead, somewhere that isn’t exclusive.

                  • @qfjp@lemmy.one
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    11 year ago

                    There is no monopoly in video streaming. Not even close.

                    Ah, you’re one of those people. Okay.

      • @agent_flounder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        Yes except everyone knows YouTube has a massive, massive market advantage in that space. And the channel you want to watch isn’t on the others. And you know this too.