I’m in my early 30’s. It’s now that I feel like I’m in a position career and life experience wise where I can remember enough of my career frustrations from when I was younger but now also appreciate how, at times, experience can mitigate a lack of raw talent and how talent on its own can be wasted if someone doesn’t have the experience to apply it yet.
I can’t imagine being in her position. Someone has done a very talented, ambitious person a disservice by putting her there.
Lol I can’t get over the fact Lina Khan asked for a 33% increase yo budget, but instead the budget got cut by 25% and she found out that was happening today in the hearing.
Nothing I guess, i’ll just bow out till new news presents itself
Gerrymandering happens in all states on both sides. Not all democrats are bad not all republicans are bad. To not be happy that an elected official is grilling the FTC over their terrible decisions and waste of tax payer money that we have seen throughout this process because they are of a different political party is weird.
To be fair, that is kind of what we are all doing right now, just going where the wind takes us while we wait for something to happen.
I kinda get what the FTC & CMA are going for. But why on earth are the going after gaming of all things!! So many more important things in life they both could go after that would impact people’s lives for the better, but no, gaming is the one.
I’m not American and I certainly don’t like what they’ve been doing with the MS/Activision merger, but I don’t think this is something that should be celebrated (or dunked on).
I get this merger has some politics involve in a way, but please keep it more about the merits or legal implications of the merger rather than some political discussion, thank you
I agree mostly.
At the same time, the FTC exists to work within the laws of the United States. Pursuing case after case where the law does not support your challenges is irresponsible.
Asking for more money to for ideological pursuits is a good way to get where we are. The FTC has lost something like 9 or 10 challenges in a row, I think it is at least appropriate to question the use of the existing budget under those circumstances.
I would say celebrated isn’t the right word. But I don’t agree with giving the FTC more funding than they had before until they can properly use the allocated funds they are currently being given. They need to learn to pick there battles and choose cases where they have a factual basis to stand on beyond just big tech is bad.
As saying big tech is bad is just like saying all people of a certain race are bad or all people who believe x is bad. When its not all or everyone. its certain actors.
The FTC needs to learn to work within the framework of the law and to fight the battles that violate the laws as they exist.
So, while I’m not celebrating a funding cut they also haven’t proven they deserve more funding.
I agree in theory, but laws change and pushing for change in a system that is controlled by corporations/lobbyists make it difficult to push for the kind of changes needed for consumers. While I do think better choices could be made, maybe a little theatrics is what is needed.
That’s not even remotely true.
sure it is as alot of innovations and improvments come from big tech. Big tech also employs alot of people. Big tech funds improvements in other markets. Lots of good things come from big tech. to just paint a brush and say all of big tech is bad is just ignorant. There are bad things big tech companies have done. But that doesn’t make all tech companies bad any more then it makes of all of anything else bad because of the actions of indvidual actors.
Just because something/someone doesn’t use their power/role for evil doesn’t mean they should have it. I’m not even remotely saying that Khan or the FTC were right or justified in trying to block the acquisition, but I also think ‘Big tech is bad’ isn’t far off the mark and they should be looked at with much scrutiny going forward.
There are lots of scrutiny around numerical Big Tech (Gaffa and so on), but there are big tech companies which have the potential to be lethal and are hardly monitored like drugs/pharmaco and biomed/agro tech. Here we are talking about a fucking video game company. That is all what FTC has found this year to look at.
If a Biden appointed judge ruled against the FTC, then this implies that the case has no merit. They chose Judge Corley and her district because the FTC thought they have a higher chance there(it’s one of the most liberal courts in the country), yet they still lost. This goes beyond petty politics and it’s more on just not meeting the standard of being anticompetitive plain and simple, nothing more, nothing less. That is why I’m not surprised the FTC is losing budget, and it’s because they are an ineffective department overall as they chose to prioritize ideology instead of tackling actual anti consumer practices that has been plaguing our monthly bills, finances, or even our standard of living for a while now. Can’t reward incompetence, and I am guy who wants a strong FTC, but also demand pragmatism and fairness to “all” their constituents.
I agree, but the most important part is that the law has to be changed first. You cant make legal challenges using laws that don’t exist.
Im not an american, but this case could be used in favor of FTC and Linas’ ideals if they had admitted the obvious, that this deal is not anticompetitive, but the contrary and clearn it. This would give them more respect and political strength to deal with big corps problematic deals. By persuing blindly their final goals, going against logic, data and law, they now are a descredited institution, facing resource cut. This is a phenomenal strategic error from FTC. Also the CMA.
FTC own dumb and kamikaze actions are weaking america consumer protection against bad deals and big corps, not the contrary.
CMA might get an off ramp and come out this relatively reputationally unscathed.