anti competitive

Ok but I really want Neopolitian to come back in Volume Four.

I could imagine Ruby just kind of walking around in the woods by herself, just lost in thought, and then the camera looks over her shoulder and we just see Neo just standing behind her, their face just completely deadpan. Ruby does that anime thing where she knows someone is behind her and heel turns to face them.

And Neo is just. Standing there. Her parasol isn’t even on her shoulder, it’s just kind of dangling from her hand, the spike digging a little into the dirt. Ruby, not trusting this at all, draws her weapon, but Neo still doesn’t move.

And then, Neo reaches into her pocket and takes out her Scroll before extending it forward for Ruby to take. Ruby, after a moment hesitation, carefully takes it and looks at the screen.

It’s open on a messenger app, and in the typing field is this message:

“He’s dead because of her. I want in.”

And when Ruby looks back up at her, Neo is clearly holding back tears. “You mean Cinder?”

Neo’s face shifts into a deep scowl as she nods.

“I guess we need all the help we can get…”

There has never been a point in our history that white supremacists have EVER given black people a “choice” to comply instead of harming us right away because of our visibility…and its crap to imply that, despite all actual historical evidence and our own damn accounts, were allowed to join the people who wanted to destroy us and “purify” themselves of any of our cultural influences. kind of wish people wouldn’t speak for groups they aren’t a part of and insist when and where we were targeted and to what degree when a simple google search will tell them.  It is okay to be like, “Well I can’t speak for THEM but I know that…”

Like I know that tumblr likes to act like its a competition and doesn’t like to recognize systematic and genocidal violence against black people as anything but a footnote to *more important issues*…but you really don’t nee to excuse or erase ethnic cleansing to add gravitas to your argument.  It is kind of a low blow.

I really like anti-capitalist automation discourse because it eradicates all preconceived notions about “self-interest” that supposedly support the capitalist order. In other words, it is in MY SELF-INTEREST to work a three-hour day as opposed to a nine-hour day. Democratized automation in a for-need economy opens the floodgates for this sort of thing to take hold. There’s an argument, even among the supporters, that socialism is about paying mind to collective concerns and doing away with barebones self-interest dictating economic choices. But the collectivization/democratization of resources should be a means to the end of human wellbeing across the board. My needs being met and my working shifts lasting the length of a film is in MY SELF-INTEREST because that means expanded leisure time, time I could devote to my passions rather than pointlessly generating profit for a capitalist in a job society doesn’t even need in the first place. If I want to make a device that flings cheetos into my mouth with ease, then I should be able to pursue that in my leisure time – but it sets a shitty precedent for society when people are required to work a position like that for their daily bread, all so that capitalists can turn a profit (and not so that some tangible need can be fulfilled) (and think about all the excess jobs that go into that cheeto-flinger – advertising, PR for the corporation, etc., none of which are even necessary in the grand scheme of things). It is in MY SELF-INTEREST to structure society so that I have more leisure time/freedom and the people I care about receive the same.

Seriously, this is a case of “everybody wins” or “most people lose”, and we’re currently on the latter path. Don’t let all these revolutionary changes in technology and society go to waste – for the future of human freedom, democracy, and wellbeing, we need to overthrow capitalism.

The Federal Communications Commission will vote on May 18 to formally begin the process of loosening regulations that enforce the so-called net neutrality rules for Internet providers.

Ajit Pai, who became chairman of the commission in January, says he supports a free and open Internet, which rests on a basic principle of “net neutrality.”

In an interview with NPR’s David Greene, Pai says he wants the government to focus on correcting actual anti-competitive behavior that Internet providers might demonstrate, rather than regulating against hypothetical harms.

“Preemptive regulation is appropriate when there’s a major market failure — when the Internet is broken,” he says.

FCC Chief Makes Case For Tackling Net Neutrality Violations ‘After The Fact’

Photo: Emily Bogle/NPR

“Any attempt to solve the ecological crisis within a bourgeois framework must be dismissed as chimerical. Capitalism is inherently anti-ecological. Competition and accumulation constitute its very law of life, a law … summarised in the phrase, ‘production for the sake of production.’ Anything, however hallowed or rare, ‘has its price’ and is fair game for the marketplace. In a society of this kind, nature is necessarily treated as a mere resource to be plundered and exploited. The destruction of the natural world, far being the result of mere hubristic blunders, follows inexorably from the very logic of capitalist production.”
- Murray Bookchin

Uber’s public relations falsely suggest it introduces healthy competition into a transport market vitiated by special interests jealously protecting poor service and anti-competitive practices. But the basis of Uber’s business model has nothing to do with innovation or fair competition and everything to do with classic predatory capitalism, maximizing profits by externalizing costs as much as possible and minimizing costs it cannot externalize. Uber’s multinational business tax profile offers minimal contribution to the upkeep of roads and highways. Uber may pay the authorities of a given country for permission to operate there, but the amount will certainly be much less than the revenue lost from transport operators displaced by Uber. Nor is it true, as its promoters argue, that Uber makes more efficient use of its drivers’ vehicles. A typical Uber driver wastes 40 percent of their time driving between fares. So it is false to argue that Uber contributes to the local economy or is environmentally more sustainable than other taxi businesses. Uber contributes nothing to public health systems to cover costs from accidents involving their drivers or to mitigate environmental pollution their drivers’ vehicles create.
—  ‘Why Nicaragua Was Smart to Reject Uber’, teleSUR
'Brace for a long and ugly battle' — Wall Street reacts to the escalating fight between Apple and Qualcomm

(A customer views the new iPhone 7 smartphone inside an Apple Inc. store in Los AngelesThomson Reuters)
Apple and Qualcomm are in a bitter legal battle.

Qualcomm makes chips that go into the iPhone and also licenses patents to Apple, but Apple would like to change their business arrangement. Earlier this year, Apple sued Qualcomm for allegedly overcharging, timed alongside the FTC announcing it was investigating Qualcomm for anti-competitive practices. That lawsuit is ongoing. 

Qualcomm is firing back. The latest development: In a separate suit, Qualcomm is alleging that Apple is violating a handful of patents that affect things like device charging or data transfer.

Qualcomm is even asking courts to ban certain iPhone models from being sold in the United States.

This battle is complex, but here’s what you need to know. 

Qualcomm filed its suit with the the International Trade Commission, a fast-moving judicial body. It also filed the suit in federal court. 

“The good news is that the ITC is typically a much more quickly moving jurisdiction than district courts, so this case could be decided sooner than was originally expected. The press release indicated that the case is expected to be tried next year,” Raymond James analyst Tavis McCourt wrote on Friday. 

Still, a decision isn’t expected until late 2018 or even early 2019. 


“Qualcomm said that it expects the ITC to start its investigation in August. We note that in the Cisco-Arista ITC case of, which was filed in Dec 2014, it took nearly 18 months before the ITC could issue a cease and detest order. We suspect that Qualcomm-Apple ITC investigation could take similar amount of time to process,” JPMorgan analyst Tom Hall wrote in a note to clients. 

“We do not see many immediate implications as Qualcomm expects the case to be tried next year,” Macquarie analyst Srini Pajjuri wrote. 

President Trump could get involved.


“We note that the official litigation process includes an ITC hearing, leading to an ITC Initial determination and then a final determination, followed by a presidential review. We note that any exclusion orders come into effect after the presidential review,” Credit Suisse analyst Kulbinder Garcha wrote on Friday.  

“We also note that when Samsung got an ITC ruling against Apple in 2013, it was vetoed by President Obama,” RBC analyst Amit Daryanani wrote. 

The patents Qualcomm alleges Apple violates were all issued in the last four years and aren’t the “industry standard” patents that were part of previous lawsuits.

“Qualcomm claims that these patents (all issued in the last four years) are not required for any industry standard, and play key roles in extending battery life and high-speed performance,” Credit Suisse analyst Kulbinder Garcha wrote on Friday. 

Qualcomm doesn’t want Apple to stop selling iPhones with Qualcomm chips. It only wants to stop Apple from selling iPhones with Intel modems, which could be as many as 17% of Apple’s total iPhone volume. 

“Qualcomm is requesting the ITC to issue a Limited Exclusion Order (LEO) to bar importation of the iPhone and other products that infringe on Qualcomm’s patents. Qualcomm is seeking this LEO against iPhones that do not use baseband processors from the company,” Hall wrote. 

“We note that Apple ships ~31% of iPhones into the US. Of these shipments in to the US, we believe that ~55% do not use Qualcomm’s baseband. Overall, we believe that ~17% of total iPhone volume is exposed to the ITC complaint filed by Qualcomm,” he continued. 

Apple would probably pay up if there was a real chance of certain iPhones being barred from the United States. 

“While this Qualcomm complaint creates some risk for a potential injunction for Apple products longer-term (unlikely before 18 months), we believe Apple would quickly start paying Qualcomm licensing fees through its ODM partners should an injunction occur,” Cannacord analyst T. Michael Walkley wrote in a note for clients on Friday.

“Even if Qualcomm receives an injunction, we believe Apple would just resume paying ODMs for Qualcomm licensing fees and then continue to battle Qualcomm in courts as Apple works to lower its royalty payments to Qualcomm.”

This lawsuit is likely to be used as a bargaining chip on the way to a settlement. 

REUTERS/Mike Blake" data-mce-source=“Thomson Reuters” data-mce-caption=“One of many Qualcomm buildings is shown in San Diego, California” width=“650” height=“488”/>(One of many Qualcomm buildings is shown in San Diego, CaliforniaThomson Reuters)

“The increasingly intense legal battle is likely to be long drawn given multiple patents, govt agencies and geographies involved. Ultimately we expect parties to reach a settlement for agreeable economics, though timing and terms are uncertain,” RBC analyst Amit Daryanani wrote. 

“Posturing like this is not uncommon even during late stages of a negotiation process. Apple vs Ericsson dispute saw its share of bitter arguments right until the eventual settlement,” Pajjuri wrote. 

“Our understanding is this is a completely different case … so a victory or loss in this case would likely have little bearing on the lawsuits around [industry standard patents] filed by Apple, but this case could certainly be used as leverage to draw Apple to the bargaining table,” McCourt wrote. 

Ultimately, Apple investors shouldn’t worry about this lawsuit. 

“While Qualcomm's actions mark an escalation in feud with Apple, we don’t think there is a cause for alarm for investors. Near term impact on Apple should be negligible,” Daryanani wrote. 

“We do not believe the Qualcomm ITC complaint creates risk to our 2018 Apple estimates,” Walkley wrote. 

Qualcomm investors may want to pay attention. 

“We expect [Qualcomm] stock to remain range-bound until a settlement is reached, and maintain Neutral,” Pajjuri wrote, giving the stock a $55 price target. 

“We believe this overhang will continue to persist. We rate Qualcomm Market-Perform,” Bernstein analyst Stacy Rasgon wrote. 

“While resolution does not appear imminent, we believe these legal battles will continue to be an overhang and expect potential share price volatility around court decisions,” Wells Fargo analyst Maynard Um wrote. 


More From Business Insider

anonymous asked:

Oliver got her sister "killed" after cheating on her. She has every right to lash our. BUT despite that she still said she was sorry and wanted to be there for him. Now you bring up Laurel during her depression where she STILL said she was sorry.

True story: when I woke up this morning, I did the same thing I do every morning. I checked my email and then I browsed Twitter (and then I read some fic but that’s not relevant to this story so I’ll just wash over that bit).  I saw these anons, smirked, and then headed over to Twitter where I posted this: 

I got several lovely replies that made me chuckle.  Thank you, Twitter crew. You guys are real. 

Honestly? I kinda wish I’d written down last night exactly what I expected to receive in my inbox because it’s uncanny how spot on I was.  Right down to the blaming my hate for Laurel on being an Olicity fan (that’s supposed to say “bitter”, not “biter” in that second ask there). I mean, the whole reason I stuck in the bit about forming this opinion before Felicity was even introduced was to underline that my feelings for Laurel had nothing to do with Olicity (and vice versa), but that’s fine.  This person clearly can’t spell, I’m not sure I should hold them up to reading comprehension as well.  Plus, I suppose I should give props to them for finding then post since I went to lengths to assure that it wouldn’t end up in the tags.  Which tells me they go looking for anti LL posts.  Which, omg you guys, that’s so depressing.  Stop.  Embrace the light.

I have a few minutes so I thought, hey, why not address these?  The first anon starts off with saying that LL had very good reason to be upset.  I DON’T DISAGREE.  Here’s the reading comprehension thing again.  Go back to my post and read what I said.  Oh here, I’ll just excerpt it for you: 

You see, LL had this undeniably sympathetic situation and somehow STILL MANAGED to be completely unsympathetic. 

I stand by what I said.  Because she wasted the sympathy that the audience wanted to have for her for her very righteous position by saying some of the most hurtful things.  You think her apology towards the end of the episode made it all okay?  How about the next day when he’d just got done recounting his father’s dead in front of a crowded courtroom and she basically told him the same thing again?  How about all season 1 when she continually told him what a terrible person was, how he couldn’t possibly be the Hood because he’s far too selfish?  I get it: some people lash out and then apologize.  Sometimes, that works.  Sometimes, it doesn’t.  In Laurel’s case, in my esteem, it does not work because her reactions to Oliver show me a side of her personality that I find utterly repulsive.  

Here’s the thing (and I’m about to get a little more personal than I usually do on this blog but bear with me): I’ve faced loss in my life.  Terrible, tragic, gut-wrenching loss.  And in the darkest moments, when my heart felt like it was being torn from my chest, I remember having one devastatingly clear thought: 

I wouldn’t wish this on my worst enemy.

I’m not a hero.  I don’t have some grand comic book destiny, a leather jacket or a hood or a mask or anything waiting for me after I’ve endured my crucible.  I’m just an average person.  I’m not more special, no more kind and compassionate than anyone else out there.  But believe me when I say: when you’ve endured the depths that this life has to offer, the last thing you want is for more people to suffer that same fate. That doesn’t make you a good person, it makes you a decent person. Laurel did not show that quality in the slightest.  And they expect me to believe that she’s a hero?  HOW?!

I’m not saying that she had to forgive Oliver or even not be angry with him.  Again, if you notice my initial post, my issue was how she expressed that anger.  Because the things she said to him, both in the pilot and the episode(s) that followed crossed a line for me.  And it wasn’t just about Oliver and the horrible things he did to her and her family.  What about Thea?  What about Moira?  Laurel was basically saying that she wanted them to suffer as well, all because she’d been betrayed.  Is it somehow better to excuse it as “she wasn’t thinking of them right then”?  Because for me, its not.  

On top of all of that, I was supposed to believe she was still in love with him?  HAHAHA… no.  Everything I’ve said is based on her just treating him like a fellow human being.  Would you ever say that to someone that you love with all your heart?  God, you guys.  I honestly don’t know if any of you could actually say that you would, but if you can then I just find that so … sad.  Legitimately SAD.  

As for the rest of what these anons brought up: I get that they’re trying to rehabilitate her character but I’ve yet to really see Laurel do anything that isn’t at least slightly informed by her innate selfishness.  I haven’t seen her have a truly heroic moment.  I just got done rewatching all three seasons, believe me, I looked.  I wanted to give her a chance this season but it was too little, too late. 

A little healthy competition...

It’s hiatus time which means fandom switches gears and instead of focusing on “what’s coming next!” it becomes a mash of “what just happened” + “lets promote our ship/vote in this poll/write this meta” + “i want to celebrate what I love about this ship!”.  A lot of times its a mix of all three of those things.  Hiatus is for unity within a fandom/ship… you don’t generally see a lot of in-fighting going on.  People talk more about their lives.  People talk more about other shows/ships.  

This hiatus, so far, has been a whirlwind of polls and voting.  I don’t think it’s stopped since the finale aired, has it?  We’ve gone from one poll to the next to the next to the next… While it’s exhausting to keep up with all of it, it’s also wonderful affirmation for our fandom and our ship. Olicity has been recognized and is being celebrated, as it should.  We went through a lot of angst to get here. This is our reward.  The promise of this is what kept us going during those long Ray-Palmer-filled nights.

Keep reading