Resident of the world, traveling the road of life
63460 stories
·
20 followers

Die Luftwaffe führt ihre internen Strategiegespräche ...

1 Share
Die Luftwaffe führt ihre internen Strategiegespräche per … Webex. Ja, der Closed-Source-Ranzkack von Cisco.

Ihr AHNT ja nicht, was als nächstes passierte!

Der russische Staatssender hat eine Aufzeichnung einer internen Besprechung von Luftwaffen-Offizieren geleakt.
Das ist ja unglaublich, Bob!

Was sagt ihr? Ihr wundert euch, dass das die Russen und nicht die Amis abgehört haben? ABER NATÜRLICH haben die Amis das auch abgehört, aber die senden das halt nicht im Fernsehen für die Propaganda dann.

Ich wundere mich ja bei der Industrie schon immer, dass ein geringeres Opsec-Niveau haben als ein paar Nerds beim D&D-Abend. Bei der Bundeswehr wundert mich gar nichts, aber es stellt sich ja wie so häufig die Frage, wieso wir diesen Mount Everest der Inkompetenz auch noch mit Steuergelder besprenkeln. Wieso bezahlen wir die Amerikaner noch dafür, dass sie unsere Telcos abhören können?!

Read the whole story
mkalus
7 minutes ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Pluralistic: Amazon's financial shell game let it create an "impossible" monopoly (01 Mar 2024)

1 Share


Today's links



Hieronymus Bosch's painting The Conjurer. The head of the conjurer has been replaced with Jeff Bezos's grinning head. There's an Amazon logo on his table, and another overhead. The cups from his cup-and-ball game have been replaced with inverted Amazon cartons. Every hand visible in the image has had numerous extra fingers painstakingly manually added to it in the hopes of goading a moralizing scold into complaining that this image is AI generated so that I can make fun of them.

Amazon's financial shell game let it create an "impossible" monopoly (permalink)

For the pro-monopoly crowd that absolutely dominated antitrust law from the Carter administration until 2020, Amazon presents a genuinely puzzling paradox: the company's monopoly power was never supposed to emerge, and if it did, it should have crumbled immediately.

Pro-monopoly economists embody Ely Devons's famous aphorism that "If economists wished to study the horse, they wouldn’t go and look at horses. They’d sit in their studies and say to themselves, ‘What would I do if I were a horse?’":

https://pluralistic.net/2022/10/27/economism/#what-would-i-do-if-i-were-a-horse

Rather than using the way the world actually works as their starting point for how to think about it, they build elaborate models out of abstract principles like "rational actors." The resulting mathematical models are so abstractly elegant that it's easy to forget that they're just imaginative exercises, disconnected from reality:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/03/all-models-are-wrong/#some-are-useful

These models predicted that it would be impossible for Amazon to attain monopoly power. Even if they became a monopoly – in the sense of dominating sales of various kinds of goods – the company still wouldn't get monopoly power.

For example, if Amazon tried to take over a category by selling goods below cost ("predatory pricing"), then rivals could just wait until the company got tired of losing money and put prices back up, and then those rivals could go back to competing. And if Amazon tried to keep the loss-leader going indefinitely by "cross-subsidizing" the losses with high-margin profits from some other part of its business, rivals could sell those high margin goods at a lower margin, which would lure away Amazon customers and cut the supply lines for the price war it was fighting with its discounted products.

That's what the model predicted, but it's not what happened in the real world. In the real world, Amazon was able use its access to the capital markets to embark on scorched-earth predatory pricing campaigns. When diapers.com refused to sell out to Amazon, the company casually committed $100m to selling diapers below cost. Diapers.com went bust, Amazon bought it for pennies on the dollar and shut it down:

https://www.theverge.com/2019/5/13/18563379/amazon-predatory-pricing-antitrust-law

Investors got the message: don't compete with Amazon. They can remain predatory longer than you can remain solvent.

Now, not everyone shared the antitrust establishment's confidence that Amazon couldn't create a durable monopoly with market power. In 2017, Lina Khan – then a third year law student – published "Amazon's Antitrust Paradox," a landmark paper arguing that Amazon had all the tools it needed to amass monopoly power:

https://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/amazons-antitrust-paradox

Today, Khan is chair of the FTC, and has brought a case against Amazon that builds on some of the theories from that paper. One outcome of that suit is an unprecedented look at Amazon's internal operations. But, as the Institute for Local Self-Reliance's Stacy Mitchell describes in a piece for The Atlantic, key pieces of information have been totally redacted in the court exhibits:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/02/amazon-profits-antitrust-ftc/677580/

The most important missing datum: how much money Amazon makes from each of its lines of business. Amazon's own story is that it basically breaks even on its retail operation, and keeps the whole business afloat with profits from its AWS cloud computing division. This is an important narrative, because if it's true, then Amazon can't be forcing up retail prices, which is the crux of the FTC's case against the company.

Here's what we know for sure about Amazon's retail business. First: merchants can't live without Amazon. The majority of US households have Prime, and 90% of Prime households start their ecommerce searches on Amazon; if they find what they're looking for, they buy it and stop. Thus, merchants who don't sell on Amazon just don't sell. This is called "monopsony power" and it's a lot easier to maintain than monopoly power. For most manufacturers, a 10% overnight drop in sales is a catastrophe, so a retailer that commands even a 10% market-share can extract huge concessions from its suppliers. Amazon's share of most categories of goods is a lot higher than 10%!

What kind of monopsony power does Amazon wield? Well, for one thing, it is able to levy a huge tax on its sellers. Add up all the junk-fees Amazon charges its platform sellers and it comes out to 45-51%:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/04/25/greedflation/#commissar-bezos

Competitive businesses just don't have 45% margins! No one can afford to kick that much back to Amazon. What is a merchant to do? Sell on Amazon and you lose money on every sale. Don't sell on Amazon and you don't get any business.

The only answer: raise prices on Amazon. After all, Prime customers – the majority of Amazon's retail business – don't shop for competitive prices. If Amazon wants a 45% vig, you can raise your Amazon prices by a third and just about break even.

But Amazon is wise to that: they have a "most favored nation" rule that punishes suppliers who sell goods more cheaply in rival stores, or even on their own site. The punishments vary, from banishing your products to page ten million of search-results to simply kicking you off the platform. With publishers, Amazon reserves the right to lower the prices they set when listing their books, to match the lowest price on the web, and paying publishers less for each sale.

That means that suppliers who sell on Amazon (which is anyone who wants to stay in business) have to dramatically hike their prices on Amazon, and when they do, they also have to hike their prices everywhere else (no wonder Prime customers don't bother to search elsewhere for a better deal!).

Now, Amazon says this is all wrong. That 45-51% vig they claim from business customers is barely enough to break even. The company's profits – they insist – come from selling AWS cloud service. The retail operation is just a public service they provide to us with cross-subsidy from those fat AWS margins.

This is a hell of a claim. Last year, Amazon raked in $130 billion in seller fees. In other words: they booked more revenue from junk fees than Bank of America made through its whole operation. Amazon's junk fees add up to more than all of Meta's revenues:

https://s2.q4cdn.com/299287126/files/doc_financials/2023/q4/AMZN-Q4-2023-Earnings-Release.pdf

Amazon claims that none of this is profit – it's just covering their operating expenses. According to Amazon, its non-AWS units combined have a one percent profit margin.

Now, this is an eye-popping claim indeed. Amazon is a public company, which means that it has to make thorough quarterly and annual financial disclosures breaking down its profit and loss. You'd think that somewhere in those disclosures, we'd find some details.

You'd think so, but you'd be wrong. Amazon's disclosures do not break out profits and losses by segment. SEC rules actually require the company to make these per-segment disclosures:

https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3524&context=lawreview#:~:text=If%20a%20company%20has%20more,income%20taxes%20and%20extraordinary%20items.

That rule was enacted in 1966, out of concern that companies could use cross-subsidies to fund predatory pricing and other anticompetitive practices. But over the years, the SEC just…stopped enforcing the rule. Companies have "near total managerial discretion" to lump business units together and group their profits and losses in bloated, undifferentiated balance-sheet items:

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bartlett/public-purpose/publications/2021/dec/crouching-tiger-hidden-dragons

As Mitchell points you, it's not just Amazon that flouts this rule. We don't know how much money Google makes on Youtube, or how much Apple makes from the App Store (Apple told a federal judge that this number doesn't exist). Warren Buffett – with significant interest in hundreds of companies across dozens of markets – only breaks out seven segments of profit-and-loss for Berkshire Hathaway.

Recall that there is one category of data from the FTC's antitrust case against Amazon that has been completely redacted. One guess which category that is! Yup, the profit-and-loss for its retail operation and other lines of business.

These redactions are the judge's fault, but the real fault lies with the SEC. Amazon is a public company. In exchange for access to the capital markets, it owes the public certain disclosures, which are set out in the SEC's rulebook. The SEC lets Amazon – and other gigantic companies – get away with a degree of secrecy that should disqualify it from offering stock to the public. As Mitchell says, SEC chairman Gary Gensler should adopt "new rules that more concretely define what qualifies as a segment and remove the discretion given to executives."

Amazon is the poster-child for monopoly run amok. As Yanis Varoufakis writes in Technofeudalism, Amazon has actually become a post-capitalist enterprise. Amazon doesn't make profits (money derived from selling goods); it makes rents (money charged to people who are seeking to make a profit):

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/28/cloudalists/#cloud-capital

Profits are the defining characteristic of a capitalist economy; rents are the defining characteristic of feudalism. Amazon looks like a bazaar where thousands of merchants offer goods for sale to the public, but look harder and you discover that all those stallholders are totally controlled by Amazon. Amazon decides what goods they can sell, how much they cost, and whether a customer ever sees them. And then Amazon takes $0.45-51 out of every dollar. Amazon's "marketplace" isn't like a flea market, it's more like the interconnected shops on Disneyland's Main Street, USA: the sign over the door might say "20th Century Music Company" or "Emporium," but they're all just one store, run by one company.

And because Amazon has so much control over its sellers, it is able to exercise power over its buyers. Amazon's search results push down the best deals on the platform and promote results from more expensive, lower-quality items whose sellers have paid a fortune for an "ad" (not really an ad, but rather the top spot in search listings):

https://pluralistic.net/2023/11/29/aethelred-the-unready/#not-one-penny-for-tribute

This is "Amazon's pricing paradox." Amazon can claim that it offers low-priced, high-quality goods on the platform, but it makes $38b/year pushing those good deals way, way down in its search results. The top result for your Amazon search averages 29% more expensive than the best deal Amazon offers. Buy something from those first four spots and you'll pay a 25% premium. On average, you need to pick the seventeenth item on the search results page to get the best deal:

https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/3645/

For 40 years, pro-monopoly economists claimed that it would be impossible for Amazon to attain monopoly power over buyers and sellers. Today, Amazon exercises that power so thoroughly that its junk-fee revenues alone exceed the total revenues of Bank of America. Amazon's story – that these fees barely stretch to covering its costs – assumes a nearly inconceivable level of credulity in its audience. Regrettably – for the human race – there is a cohort of senior, highly respected economists who possess this degree of credulity and more.

Of course, there's an easy way to settle the argument: Amazon could just comply with SEC regs and break out its P&L for its e-commerce operation. I assure you, they're not hiding this data because they think you'll be pleasantly surprised when they do and they don't want to spoil the moment.

(Image: Doc Searls, CC BY 2.0, modified)


Hey look at this (permalink)



A Wayback Machine banner.

This day in history (permalink)

#15yrsago Amazon supplier loses warehouse lease, invites the public to loot its books https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/4863490/Books-given-away-for-free-at-one-of-Britains-biggest-warehouses.htmlhttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/01/crimea-crisis-deepens-as-russia-and-ukraine-ready-forces-live-updates

#10yrsago Disney drops $4.8M in Boy Scouts funding over anti-gay policy https://edition.cnn.com/2014/02/28/us/disney-pulls-boy-scouts-funding/index.html

#10yrsago South Carolina legislature confiscates budget of college for assigning Alison Bechdel’s “Fun Home” as a reading https://www.csmonitor.com/Books/chapter-and-verse/2014/0228/Alison-Bechdel-s-memoir-Fun-Home-runs-into-trouble-with-the-South-Carolina-House-of-Representatives

#10yrsago TSA agents demand bag-search to look for “Bitcoins” https://web.archive.org/web/20140302025836/https://dailyanarchist.com/2014/02/24/the-tsa-is-looking-for-bitcoin/

#5yrsago University of California system libraries break off negotiations with Elsevier, will no longer order their journals https://www.science.org/content/article/university-california-boycotts-publishing-giant-elsevier-over-journal-costs-and-open

#5yrsago German Data Privacy Commissioner warns at new Copyright Directive will increase the tech oligopoly, make EU companies dependent on US filter vendors, and subject Europeans to surveillance by US companies https://torrentfreak.com/german-data-privacy-commissioner-sounds-alarm-over-upload-filter-oligopoly-190301/



Colophon (permalink)

Today's top sources:

Currently writing:

  • A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING

  • Picks and Shovels, a Martin Hench noir thriller about the heroic era of the PC. FORTHCOMING TOR BOOKS JAN 2025

  • The Bezzle, a Martin Hench noir thriller novel about the prison-tech industry. FORTHCOMING TOR BOOKS FEB 2024

  • Vigilant, Little Brother short story about remote invigilation. FORTHCOMING ON TOR.COM

  • Spill, a Little Brother short story about pipeline protests. FORTHCOMING ON TOR.COM

Latest podcast: The Majority of Censorship is Self-Censorship https://craphound.com/news/2024/02/25/the-majority-of-censorship-is-self-censorship/

Upcoming appearances:

Recent appearances:

Latest books:

Upcoming books:

  • Picks and Shovels: a sequel to "Red Team Blues," about the heroic era of the PC, Tor Books, February 2025

  • Unauthorized Bread: a graphic novel adapted from my novella about refugees, toasters and DRM, FirstSecond, 2025


This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.


How to get Pluralistic:

Blog (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

Pluralistic.net

Newsletter (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://pluralistic.net/plura-list

Mastodon (no ads, tracking, or data-collection):

https://mamot.fr/@pluralistic

Medium (no ads, paywalled):

https://doctorow.medium.com/

Twitter (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://twitter.com/doctorow

Tumblr (mass-scale, unrestricted, third-party surveillance and advertising):

https://mostlysignssomeportents.tumblr.com/tagged/pluralistic

"When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla" -Joey "Accordion Guy" DeVilla

Read the whole story
mkalus
8 hours ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Das BSI hilft der Feuerwehr beim Absichern ihrer IT-Systeme.Wie? ...

1 Share
Das BSI hilft der Feuerwehr beim Absichern ihrer IT-Systeme.

Wie? Na wie immer beim BSI. Mit einer Checkliste voller Compliance-Bullshit. Haben Sie schon ein paar Virenscanner installiert?

Aber wartet, das ist noch nicht die Punchline.

In welcher Form verteilen sie die Checkliste?

Richtig geraten! Als Excel-File!

Genau mein Humor!

Read the whole story
mkalus
8 hours ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Das ist schon länger so, aber jetzt ist es amtlich: ...

1 Share
Das ist schon länger so, aber jetzt ist es amtlich: Nehmt Displayport. Lasst HDMI einen langsamen, schmerzhaften Tod sterben.
Read the whole story
mkalus
13 hours ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Hey, ihr Penner da draußen! Ich hoffe, ihr fühlt ...

1 Share
Hey, ihr Penner da draußen! Ich hoffe, ihr fühlt euch RICHTIG schlecht! Denn ihr seid Schuld am Klimawandel, sagt der CEO von Exxon.
The world isn’t on track to meet its climate goals — and it’s the public’s fault, a leading oil company CEO told journalists.
Ja aber echt mal! Ihr Penner, ihr!!
Exxon Mobil Corp. CEO Darren Woods told editors from Fortune that the world has “waited too long” to begin investing in a broader suite of technologies to slow planetary heating.
Wir Deppen haben die ganze Zeit das Geld den Ölkonzernen gegeben, damit die das ordentlich investieren! Was für Vollidioten wir waren!

Der Exxon-CEO hat völlig recht. Wir hätten ihn schon vor Jahrzehnten in den Knast werfen sollen, anstatt ihm noch Geld zuzuwerfen. Lasst uns das jetzt nachholen!

Read the whole story
mkalus
13 hours ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete

Einer der größten Irrtümer in der IT ist, dass eine ...

1 Share
Einer der größten Irrtümer in der IT ist, dass eine Firma, die sich auf etwas spezialisiert hat, und das als Dienstleistung anbietet, das dann besser oder gewissenhafter macht als man es selber gemacht hätte.

Nein. Tun sie nicht.

Die sind nicht darauf spezialisiert, etwas gut zu machen, sondern etwas billig zu machen. Das Ziel von Firmen im Kapitalismus ist die Profitmaximierung.

Die Erfahrung zeigt deutlich in die Gegenrichtung.

A technology company that routes millions of SMS text messages across the world has secured an exposed database that was spilling one-time security codes that may have granted users’ access to their Facebook, Google and TikTok accounts.
Instinktiv könnte man vielleicht annehmen, dass eine Firma, die nur MFA-SMS zustellen soll, da nicht viel falsch machen kann. Aber das stimmt halt nicht.

Genau so ist das mit "der Cloud" und mit "die verwalten unsere Telefonanlage" und allem anderen in der IT da draußen.

Du brauchst auf jeden Fall genug Kompetenz in-house, um selber prüfen zu können, ob du gerade verarscht wirst. In den meisten Fällen kannst du dir dann den Mittelsmann auch gleich sparen und deren Profitmarge und kommst unter dem Strich billiger bei weg.

Read the whole story
mkalus
13 hours ago
reply
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136
Share this story
Delete
Next Page of Stories