Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Censorship Twitter

Musk Says 'Time To Break Up Amazon,' Escalating Feud With Bezos (bloomberg.com) 129

Posted by BeauHD from the but-not-for-reasons-you'd-think dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: Tesla Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk said it's "time to break up Amazon" in a tweet Thursday, escalating a rivalry with Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, another billionaire investing in space exploration. "Monopolies are wrong," Musk tweeted while tagging Bezos, the world's wealthiest man. Musk's post came in response to a tweet from a writer who said his book titled "Unreported Truths About COVID-19 and The Lockdown" was being removed from Amazon's Kindle publishing division for violating unspecified guidelines. The book that was removed by Amazon was written by lockdown critic and former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson. "Due to the rapidly changing nature of information around the COVID-19 virus, we are referring customers to official sources for health information about the virus," Amazon said to Berenson. "Please consider removing references to COVID-19 for this book."

In comments to Breitbart News, Berenson explained the topic of his now-censored e-book on the coronavirus, calling it "An introduction and a discussion of death coding, death counts, and who is really dying from COVID, as well as a worst-case estimate of deaths with no mitigation efforts."

Berenson added, "I briefly considered censorship but assumed I wouldn't have a problem both because of my background, because anyone who reads the booklet will realize it is impeccably sourced, nary a conspiracy theory to be found, and frankly because Amazon shouldn't be censoring anything that doesn't explicitly help people commit criminal behavior. [...] I have no idea if the decision was made by a person, an automated system, or a combination (i.e. the system flags anything with COVID-19 or coronavirus in the title and then a person decides on the content)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Musk Says 'Time To Break Up Amazon,' Escalating Feud With Bezos More

Musk Says 'Time To Break Up Amazon,' Escalating Feud With Bezos

Comments Filter:

  • Good. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by melted ( 227442 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @05:47PM (#60146616) Homepage

    Amazon has grown way too large for anyone's good, including its own. Break it up and restore competition.

    • Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 04, 2020 @05:49PM (#60146622)

      While they are at it, break up the Microsoft and Google monopolies too.

      • Re:Good. (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Random361 ( 6742804 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @06:02PM (#60146676)

        While they are at it, break up the Microsoft and Google monopolies too.

        And Facebook and Twitter too while they're at it.

        • And any company or organization of more than 10 people. That would assist with CoVID-19 transmission...

          • Re:Good. (Score:5, Interesting)

            by rtb61 ( 674572 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @08:47PM (#60147216) Homepage

            No you do it based upon capital value. This economically tied to the principle of limited liability for investors in public corporations, the escape from liability for the debts the company generates, even while they can access the revenue those debts create. That limited liability, should be limited because too large companies generate too much debt and become far to great a risk to put on the public. So a cap of say 10 billion dollars, stay below that and limited liability remains in place, go over that cap and limited liability disappears, all investors become liable for all debts of a company that exceeds a market cap of 10 billion dollars. I'll bet those investors will either want those companies broken up or run a whole lot more carefully and sensibly.

            Limited market cap for limited liability, exceed that market cap and all investors become liable for all debts.

            Besides Amazon is a psychopathically greedy to the point of stupidity. On Amazon streaming service, do you know what the idiot fuckers do, when you search for a video, they actively include videos you can not access, to remind you of how shite their streaming service is, how much content they exclude and how crap that service is. It is pretty clear, they want to charge customers to watch advertisements for the products Amazons sells and they actively advertise how crap their streaming service is and all the content they do not have and want to charge you extra for. So fucking cancelled.

            That kind of psycho arrogance only comes from establishing a monopoly and being able to abuse suppliers and customers alike. Break that fucking bitch up.

            • so much for stock options and investors making it.
              people keep forgetting that for 100 companies try to make a go of it, very few make it to the top and most fail.

              Amazon and Telsa do exactly what the consumer wants. They hear it.
              If it offends the top management they remove the offense.

              it's interesting that everyone here forget's, Amazon is a catalog, if they choose not to sell your product, you can go to another seller.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by sjames ( 1099 )

                If there was half a dozen Amazon like companies out there, perhaps due to a maximum market cap limit on limited liability, your advice to go to another seller might not ring so hollow.

                • that's the same thing they said about sears 100 years ago. but they are gone today.
                  someone always builds a better mousetrap when frustration kicks in.

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by sjames ( 1099 )

                    And to think, only one generation was born, lived their entire lives, and died of old age waiting for that to happen.

        • But I depend on Amazon Prime for my supply of yridium bicantizine.

        • Why stop there? Why not liquidate are any company worth more than $100B?

          • Why stop there? Why not liquidate are any company worth more than $100B?

            Because America is already losing a net $400B annually in capital investment.

            We should be trying to win businesses back, not drive more investment overseas.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by gl4ss ( 559668 )

        ms and google have nowhere near the monopoly of amazon.

        however it is kind of funny for musk to do this because of his old paypal connection, during which paypal made a lot of money by being "not a bank" while lobbying successfully to get _all_ competition shuttered down by the government for a while because "they were acting as banks".

        it is kinda funny for an outsider how easy it was for amazon to sidestep sales taxes and as a result offer free shipping in usa though in it's formative years while still rema

      • While they are at it, break up the Microsoft and Google monopolies too.

        Possibly, but they are not in the same league as Amazon. Googel and MS are only IT monopolies (if that) : Amazon is becoming a monopoly in all areas, an moving into IT too. It is becoming impossible to buy anything except through the bastards, especially with the shops shut at present. Amazon must love Covid-19.

    • Re:Good. (Score:5, Funny)

      by DontBeAMoran ( 4843879 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @08:16PM (#60147076)

      No. Fuck, no.

      I don't want to need two accounts: one for Ama.com and another for Zon.com

    • Could anyone point to am Amazon service that there isn't a sufficient replacement for?
      There are numerous stores that sell all the products, they are even online sites that help find the stores to find products.
      There are competitors for its Cloud services.
      And much of their other stuff isn't really that popular yet.
      Being big, doesn't make you a monopoly. Not being liked doesn't mean you should be broken up.

      That said, Amazon probably has became big enough that it will need some enhanced regulations on them, t

    • I think that the two political parties should be split into two parts each. With 4 parties running, the USA will hopefully slide towards a truer democracy.

  • LOL (Score:4, Informative)

    by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Thursday June 04, 2020 @05:50PM (#60146628)

    "In comments to Breitbart News, ....nary a conspiracy theory to be found, "

    I rest my case.

    • "In comments to Breitbart News, ....nary a conspiracy theory to be found, "

      I rest my case.

      That was mod'ed "Troll"?

      Whatever. I have never - ever - seen a Breibart "news" piece that passed any basic fact checking.

      This country is gone to shit when crap like Breitbart is cited as being legitimate.

      • "In comments to Breitbart News, ....nary a conspiracy theory to be found, "

        I rest my case.

        That was mod'ed "Troll"?

        Whatever. I have never - ever - seen a Breibart "news" piece that passed any basic fact checking.

        This country is gone to shit when crap like Breitbart is cited as being legitimate.

        No, that is not the proper amount of outrage for this outcome. This country's going to shit for whole other reasons than a single article citing a singular, controversial source for its explanation of the billionaire feud.

        On the plus side, perhaps the billionaire feud can be exploited like the US/Soviet Space Race that led to the first human on the moon.

  • Who the hell is Alex Berenson... (Score:3, Informative)

    by franzrogar ( 3986783 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @05:51PM (#60146632)

    ...to the a company that they *HAVE TO* sell his book?

    Quote from Berenson: "Amazon shouldn't be censoring anything that doesn't explicitly help people commit criminal behavior."

    Amazon, as any other company in the world, can sell whatever the hell they want as far as the items are not illegal.

    Or are you going to go to Barnes & Noble (or whatever other bookstore) and say they have to sell your book because... you say so?

  • Try not to be underfoot...

    Which way is most of Wall Street betting?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by cusco ( 717999 )

      Wall Street **should** be betting on both Amazon and Space X to continue rising, but since the stock market no longer resembles anything even vaguely rational they're just going to go with whoever has spoken most recently

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by BranMan ( 29917 )

        Not to be pedantic, but Wall Street can't bet on SpaceX - it's privately owned. If it were publicly traded I'd have some of my money invested in them for sure.

  • Replace Monopolies with Open Protocols (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Slicker ( 102588 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @06:02PM (#60146672)

    We can and should replace monopolies with Open Protocols. For example, a merchandise exchange and delivery protocol could replace Amazon's sales. Similarly, a bulk monthly movie lease could replace Netflix.... And in both cases, they could be much better for everyone (minus the wealthy investors behind Amazon and Netflix)..

    What if sellers simply listed their inventories with an online mesh network and buyers listed what they are seeking.. The protocol could match the two.. The more details you add about your productions (offering or seeking), the better matches can be made... After transactions, you can rate what your experiences -- the buyer can rate the product and the seller can rate the buyer.

    For movies, what if individual studios could merely make their movies available at supply/demand market rates.. Movie watchers could rent individually or select monthly bulk groupings by titles and/or criteria like, sciFi, has robots, etc (that would be mine). For producing movies, studios could publish information on what they'd like to produce and a cut of the movie rentals/bulk deals would go to fund the top selections.... Move renters would, of course, vote on which to produce.. Studios could put out descriptions and perhaps proposed trailers, etc.

    My Two Cents -- Matthew C. Tedder

    • What if sellers simply listed their inventories with an online mesh network and buyers listed what they are seeking.. The protocol could match the two.. The more details you add about your productions (offering or seeking), the better matches can be made... After transactions, you can rate what your experiences -- the buyer can rate the product and the seller can rate the buyer.

      In practice, this mutual rating thing doesn't work too well....

      • I do hate rating systems because everyone gives 4's and 5's on the most bullshit reviews
        I am slightly familiar with 4 star service, and I rarely get it outside of expensive places. and
        I can't afford 5 star service, it's freaking expensive and I only do it to spoil myself.

        most review system suck

        • The problem with ratings as currently used is that the rating systems mean nothing.

          When five stars is "expected" and four a cause for concern/discipline/termination, the system loses its meaning.

          What is necessary is to have a two-stage process, and used the *weighted* value for that rating person, further modified for its correlation to others.

          So if this person issues 90% 5s and 10% 4s, his average rating is 4.9, and a 5 isn't much above that, while a 4 is extremely low. The 5 should be not much more than

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by rea1l1 ( 903073 )

      Amazon made it big because you can return items and force the retailer to return your funds without issuing a charge back. It brings about a level of trust that you can't get when doing one on one business.

    • Will those ratings be scrubbed so they only apply to the experience, and not "I don't like their politics so even though they sent exactly what I want, I will still give them a 1 star" kind of thing?

      • Re:Replace Monopolies with Open Protocols (Score:4, Interesting)

        by DontBeAMoran ( 4843879 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @08:23PM (#60147090)

        I see so many stupid 1-star and 2-star ratings on Amazon... Here's a perfect example of one I saw recently:

        "This thing is bigger than I thought so I'm returning it. Horrible product, rating one star because I can't rate it zero stars".

        Basically, that person was too stupid to read the description and the specifications, where the dimensions were clearly listed, and somehow it's the vendor's fault that this person is stupid. People are rating "their experience" instead of the product they bought. That's dangerously close to Idiocracy levels.

        I always flag these stupid "reviews" so they can be removed by Amazon.

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by Monoman ( 8745 )

          "Arrived damaged" - 1 Star

          It's a product review, not a shipper review .... not a vendor review either unless it's part of an actual product review.

          • This depends on why the product arrived damaged. For example, if the product box itself has insufficient protection inside for the product, in my opinion it does qualify as an overall rating about the product since internal packaging is part of it.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by Monoman ( 8745 )

              Agreed but they rarely say. Instead they should add more details and/or wait until they worked with the vendor to fix their order.

            • More importantly, does this matter? Lets say company A and B both make nearly identical products with similar packaging. I would expect each to suffer the same shipping damage rate since they all come via the same carriers. So everybody has a 4.5 star rating excluding the damaged shipping reviews. Now maybe those bring it down to a 4.4 for each company. But as long as they are affected equally it doesn't matter. Comparatively they are the same and so that wouldn't affect future purchasing decisions si

        • A case for meta-moderation ;-)

          Actually, there's quite a lot of discussion about this on travel review sites. If you're a 3-star sort of hotel user, and you stay at a 5 star hotel, you're going to love it, and will give it a great review. If you stay in 5 star hotels a lot, then if this particular one falls short of the rest, then you'll give it a lower rating.

          As the reader of those reviews, which review is more important to you? It all depends on context - just like the reviews themselves. Hotels are using

          • I'm a guy, that is a solid 3 - 4 star hotel user. I book a 5 star just to get that extra experience and a way to spoil myself.
            I agree, I will look at a reviewers past reviews, just to make sure that they are a solid 5 start reviewer. and when I do write
            a review, I enjoy detailing my normal group of stays IE: Delano in Miami Beach is a solid 3.5 stars, but most people think it's a 5 star. Setai on the other hand is is a 5 star that people rate as 4 stars. it's all about the service, and staff cost money.

            Bein

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by fermion ( 181285 )
      We have open protocols. We have science and math that tells people who to work more efficiently. The companies that use them prosper, the companies that don't don't.

      Back in the 1970's Carter had to bail out the auto industry. This bail out was because the Asian auto manufacturers were using the developing mathematics of quality control and logistics to build their cars, while the US manufacturers were still using the original technology of the 1900s. Because the bailout included some incentive, the US

      • > This bail out was because the Asian auto manufacturers were using the developing
        >mathematics of quality control and logistics to build their cars,

        Well, Japan. There weren't really any others at the time.

        The irony is that the Japanese did this by going full-bore on Deming--an American who was there because he couldn't get hired in the US for his "nutso" ideas. He kind of got the last laugh on this.

        Also, most folks don't realize that in the Chrysler bailout (no, not Ford and GM), the government mad

    • You just described a distributed Ebay. But then you have to partner with a shipping company. And sellers don't want to have a garage full of product. Sellers don't want to deal with putting product in a box and printing a label.

      Amazon is a Warehouse (something sellers don't want to do) and it's a shipping company (something sellers don't want to be).

      Netflix is a content creation company now. That means not just licensing movies but also producing them. You need to review scripts, you need to pick the on

    • You can already set up a shop that automatically pulls products from Amazon and you get a commission from sales.

      What you're really arguing for is shutting down Amazon.com and demanding that independent parties are only allowed to create front ends for their databases.

      Which is silly.

  • I agree something should be done but I'm not sure if their are obvious lines of separation.

    • The obvious lines are "AWS" and "an online store." But that wouldn't help with the problem of censorship. What is needed is a way to give them competition so when something is censored, it has an alternative route to getting to people.

      But I have no idea what you could do to give Amazon more competition in terms of selling books.

      • Re:Break it up along what lines? (Score:4, Informative)

        by DontBeAMoran ( 4843879 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @08:27PM (#60147114)

        AWS
        Online physical goods store
        Online media store

        • Those are easy lines along which to divide the company, but what does it accomplish in terms of benefitting society?

        • I'd actually do: AWS, the store itself (so video, music, photos, whatever services can be here), and the manufactured products.(amazon basics, fire tablets, video production companies if they own them, basically anything they make).

          AWS can't carry the other pieces. The store shouldn't be able to leverage their sales data to decide what branded products to sell so instead they're focused on good logistics and providing a place buyers and sellers are confident in. If Amazon wants to make products, they can do

      • AWS
        Wholesale importer disguised as a marketplace
        Retail store

        • ok, that is a logical division, but how does that help anything?

          • By containerizing the wholesale and marketplace, you require them to actually follow US patent law. That reduces the problem of counterfeits.

            That allows other retailers to compete fairly with the retail portion.

            It has other benefits too, that are beyond the scope of the Sherman Act.

            • By containerizing the wholesale and marketplace, you require them to actually follow US patent law. That reduces the problem of counterfeits.

              What

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Alworx ( 885008 )

      IMHO the same company should not

      sell goods
      produce goods
      deliver goods
      advertise goods

      • So then Tesla also needs to get broken up, too...

      • You just described 99.99999% of all companies on the planet.

        • IMHO the same company should not
          sell goods
          produce goods
          deliver goods
          advertise goods

          You just described 99.99999% of all companies on the planet.

          No, the vast majority of companies don't produce any goods. They just buy them, advertise them, and then sell them on at a profit. They claim they are "adding value". Amazon is one of these.

  • A perfect storm of issues going on here (Score:5, Interesting)

    by JoshuaZ ( 1134087 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @06:03PM (#60146680) Homepage

    Musk and Bezos have a long-running rivalry in space issues, since Musk runs SpaceX and Bezos runs BlueOrigin. Honestly, the fact that this still bothers Musk is a little ridiculous because SpaceX is doing so much more than BlueOrigin that it isn't funny. BO has had more funding and more time to operate but hasn't even had a single rocket reach orbit. This is now combining with Musk's contrariainism concerning COVID-19 which has come up before on Slashdot. However, picking out Berenson of all people to support is a pretty bad idea; Berenson is, to put it as politely as possible, a crank, who first came to large-scale attention for his book "Tell Your Children" which is essentially a modern day version of Reefer Madness where he argues that marijuana is absolutely terrible https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Berenson [wikipedia.org]. He's become a prominent member of the segment of the population arguing that COVID-19 isn't really a threat and that basic steps like minimal social distancing and masks are unnecessary.

    At a more general level, it is worth asking if it makes sense from an anti-trust perspective to even talk about breaking up Amazon. To be clear: Nothing in the Sherman Anti-Trust Act says anything about breaking up a company because they don't want to sell your product. The classic context for anti-trust is if a corporation is using its market power to harm others in the market or using a monopoly to jack up prices. Amazon is not doing anything of the sort. Nor was Amazon formed by some giant conglomeration so it isn't a carefully disguised cartel. They've grown primarily by just being very good at what they do. I don't like Amazon very much for a whole host of reasons, but it is very hard to see any coherent anti-trust argument that would have much of a chance of surviving in court.

    I do wish Musk would focus more on running SpaceX and Tesla. He's very good at both of those, but his tweeting is just inane. And I'm sure it makes other people like Gwynne Shotwell who runs SpaceX's day to day operations have terrible headaches. More building electric cars and spaceships to Mars, and less twitter fights, please.

    • Bezos both owner and merchant in walled garden (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      it is worth asking if it makes sense from an anti-trust perspective to even talk about breaking up Amazon.

      The Amazon walled garden is a competitive market that is not a level playing field, because Bezos is simultaneously the owner of the market and a merchant within it. This unavoidably places other merchants in that market at a competitive disadvantage vs its owner.

      This problem is compounded whenever Amazon plays favourites and promotes one supplier above others within a product category under undisclose

  • This should be good (Score:3)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @06:05PM (#60146684)

    I'm going to do my best to stay on the sidelines for this one. I do find it funny that people invest so much personal capital taking one side or another in these billionaire versus billionaire matchups.

  • Pay bananas, get monkeys (Score:3)

    by thesjaakspoiler ( 4782965 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @06:14PM (#60146728)

    This is usually not related to censorship or racism.
    It's usually good intentions poorly executed by a bunch of monkeys who just blindly follow the rules out of fear from the executives.

  • Amazon is unable to censor anyone (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Sloppy ( 14984 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @06:18PM (#60146734) Homepage Journal

    Amazon does not have the ability to censor anything. If they get 100 times bigger and more influential, they still won't have any legal way (other than lobbying legislators to change the law, giving them that ability).

    I think it would be highly amusing if Amazon brought all their resources to bear on a futile attempt to censor someone (provided they stay within the law: no hitmen!!). Their utter failure would be spectacular. This is a David-vs-Goliath scenario that any David can trivially win. How much does a website cost these days?

    (As for breaking up Amazon, I don't have much of an opinion. But made-up anecdotes like this, are a good reminder to us all, that some people who advocate on the topic will be arguing in bad faith.)

  • Not censored any more (Score:3, Informative)

    by azuroff ( 318072 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @06:26PM (#60146752)

    It's been un-censored according to the author - https://twitter.com/AlexBerens... [twitter.com]

  • That's all I need to know.

  • Breitbart? Really? (Score:4)

    by presearch ( 214913 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @07:43PM (#60146960)

    The slashdot slide continues.

  • Anti-vax (Score:4, Insightful)

    by fermion ( 181285 ) on Thursday June 04, 2020 @07:52PM (#60146984) Homepage Journal
    The spread of completely exaggerated vaccine risk shows what happens when we allow false information to run rampant. Many things in public discussion deserve to be debated, even with controversial sources, but certain things must be reigned in.

    For instance, when we are projecting tropical storms, we cannot pull out our sharpie and provide fake trajectory simply because we feel like it. Weather predictions have enough error as it is, and the the rate of false positives provide a public safety as it is. Sometimes people evacuate unnecessarily due to an real error in analysis and lives are lost. Sometimes people only see the boy who cried wolf and don't evacuate and lives are lost. The only defense is to be honest about the analysis, confidence, and errors. I don't think anyone is going to advocate for publishing of a book telling people it better just to party.

    Health care is another case. We already have enough bad information floating around with media outlets publishing unverified results just to get clicks. The nutrient will make you smart, this food will kill you. The fact is that the fake health news operation is well funded and quite sophisticated due to the money involve. The first study done revealing the negative health effects of smoking was the late 1800's. For years the ads would state the brands doctors preferred because in any statistical analysis there will always be a winner, even if that winner is not statistically relevant, which no one understands anyway. For years doctors refused to wash their hands because what you can't see can't hurt you.

    And now it is critical that we ignore the health risks of COVID-19, and allow the government death panels decide how many and who will die.

  • There are lots of reasons you might come up with to justify breaking down monopolies, but censor a bunch of premature pseudoscience from a mainstream bookstore isn't one of them. You don't have a right to force people to publish and distribute your products. It's mostly up to the store as to what they want to sell. Most book stores aren't going to sell that book and unlike Amazon they have much more time to focus on their few total products. Amazon no the other hand sells so much stuff they rely on the use
  • Elon Musk Vs. Jeff Bezos! Two men enter One man leaves!

  • I like Elon even if he says stupid stuff pretty often. This comment though is going to come back and smack him here in a few years. Lets look at all the things Tesla is trying to be involved in.

    Cars
    Potentially Car insurance
    Battery Manufacturing
    Grid Battery Solution provider (pairs with Battery making)
    Micro Grid Battery Solution (Vehicle to Grid, if they get around to it, but also Powerwall)
    Solar Panels
    Energy Provider (Through Solar Panels and grid battery solutions)
    Taxi Services (if they ever get AP up to s

    • I believe he might be doing it on purpose. First, and some time ago, was it about breaking Microsoft apart over their quasi-monopoly. Now Elon Musk blows into the same trumpet over Amazon. By the time we get to him and his businesses might we have worn out the trumpet and nobody will want to hear it any longer.

      Fact is, we allow government institutions such as NASA and ESA to act wasteful on behalf of science, and we turn a blind eye when commercial businesses such as SpaceX are doing the same thing. Chances

      • Chances are we'll even let Elon Musk create a monopoly in commercial space travel while we also allow him to put cars into space for no good reason and (see latest news) to put another armada of low Earth orbit satellites into space for them to burn up in the atmosphere (thereby ripping holes into the ozone layer).

        Who what now?

        SpaceX launched exactly one car into space, in 2018, and hasn't done it since. It has no plans to do it again. They required some sort of mass as a test payload for the first flight of Falcon Heavy and elected to use a car as that mass rather than a lump of concrete. I swear, you launch one car and people think it's a habit.

        As for Starlink satellites reentering, this smells like an attempt at concern trolling. Earth is hit by an average of 17 meteors per day large enough that some fragments

  • I'm excited to see SpaceX Falcon 9 delivery. He'll have to promise to replace my grass though. And my house. He's got the money. Come on, Elon. Make it happen. I'll order some T-shirts or something.

  • I highly respect what Musk has done. Watching the launch was just incredible. Even though the stupid, strident speech from Trump at that time (glaring with tilted head, "America FIRST!") was nauseating. But seriously I would think again about buying a Tesla because Musk keeps making these stupid tweets apparently because he either sympathizes with Trump or owes him something big. I don't care about Bezos although I understand he is quite a piece of work too, but certainly breaking up Amazon is not something that one would tweet, nor would it be a logical step from removing a Covid outlier book from Kindle in what was obviously an automatic algorithm or mid-level staffer who did it (and it is now fixed, not that I care about the book either). It is really pestilential when Musk tweets. I wish he would just knock off all this strident bullshit, it makes me think he has white supremacist leanings the more he mirrors Trump's behavior. Now would be a very smart time to tone down the rhetoric and distance himself from Trump and any Trumpian behavior. My guess is he doesn't stop because he is beholden to the White House and it is somehow key to his winning fast tracked contracts.

  • The definition of monopoly is "the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.". Amazon sells shit. Anyone else can sell shit as well. They make it "easy". Anyone else is welcome to innovate and make online transactions and delivery easy as well. Same goes for the choruses of "and Microsoft as well!". If MS/Amazon/EvilCorp was lobbying to shut down competition before it could start, if they sued anyone that offered same day delivery, sure. Then you move to sto

  • Breakup Billionaires, NO ONE has ever EARNED 1 billion dollars. They got it by exploiting other's labor

  • alibaba is bigger.
    So, are we going to break up others? Personaly, I think that the best solution for Amazon is to break them up into multiple companies based on different Continent and let them compete. In addition, let them pay taxes where based at. After all, that is what it is all about. Even here in the states, Amazon pays very little.
    And for those that are outside of being broke up, simply tax any and all goods sold in their nation.

Slashdot Top Deals

"I'm a mean green mother from outer space" -- Audrey II, The Little Shop of Horrors

Close