These micro-examples are a reminder that corruption is a part of every human system, no matter how perfect the design.
There will always be concertgoers cutting the unwatched fence to sneak in for free.
The only plausible solution is elective transparency. Either your company and financial metadata are available for independent third party review, and records retained as defined, or else you’re not a company.
Don’t ascribe to it, get boycotted.
The plausible solution is named Blockchain and smart contracts. Until then…
Cryptocurrency is the number one vector for scams and money laundering today despite blockchains.
I’m not cryptobro but I hate that people give out about it’s use in crimes… it’s a currency, it being used in crimes is only evidence of it being used as a currency. All my drugs are bought with euros.
That’s because transactions can’t be rolled back, opening accounts doesn’t require identifying info, and there’s no possibility of payments being intercepted by a third party.
Sure, fiat can be safer when your bank is being responsible. It can be much more dangerous when they aren’t. Just ask a victim of Wells Fargo.
Okay. I’ll answer seriously to this. Blockchain can’t store an entire contract (not within reason). Likewise, contracts will never be made public. So at most you’ll get is a pointer to where the contract is held. The contents of the contract can be changed (though you could put a checksum in the chain too), but that still doesn’t address things. Also if you are concerned about “well no one else has a contract” then all that needs to happen is everyone gets a contract, then the chain is inundated with contracts and all you’d have is a pointer and a checksum and you have no idea what’s in the actual contract.
Not only that. Backroom deals without public documentation has been done since the beginning of humanity.
Even if blockchains were widely used, these things would happen outside the blockhain and no one would be the wiser.
A contract is text only, that would be a few kb at most when compressed… blockchain can definitely hold that, it can hold images, and someone even put Doom on the blockchain.
Blockchain can’t store an entire contract (not within reason).
What do you mean by this? I don’t work directly with blockchain, but it appears Eth has a 12MB block limit, which is 10,000 pages of simple text.
A block isn’t a single transaction. It’s way too inefficient to scale that way
A block is a group of transactions
Sure, that makes sense, so it looks like each contract could only be 20 pages of text, at least per transaction.
deleted
Blockchain has no viable uses. Append only databases already exist. Distributed databases already exists. It’s all a scam.
deleted
What flavor are the smaller companies?
He already said apple flavoring.
No, he said Google and Microsoft had the apple flavoring, as opposed to a smaller company.
Ice cubes is on the Apple Store though… or is this something that happened in the past and has since been changed?
deleted
deleted by creator
deleted
More than one thing can be true at once. Doesn’t mean it’s shilling.
Did I say shilling? Just don’t see the point of the comment, that’s all.
For the suddenly curious: https://qz.com/1732014/why-is-it-called-antitrust
Isn’t Netflix exempt from these fees too? Or do they just not allow you to sign up in app and redirect to a browser?
Disgusting. So glad I don’t use either.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Google fought to keep the Spotify numbers private during its antitrust fight with Epic, saying they could damage negotiations with other app developers who might want more generous rates.
And in court, Google has focused on benefits like greater flexibility rather than cost savings.
As part of the deal, both parties also agreed to commit $50 million apiece to a “success fund.”
“A small number of developers that invest more directly in Android and Play may have different service fees as part of a broader partnership that includes substantial financial investments and product integrations across different form factors,” says spokesperson Dan Jackson.
In mid-2023, it completely dropped support for Apple’s App Store billing system to avoid paying up to a 30 percent commission, and it was one of the highest-profile early members of the Coalition for App Fairness, a group that included Epic and supported the Fortnite publisher’s antitrust suit against Apple and Google.
But while Epic has continued its legal battle against both parties, Spotify apparently found an easier — and far cheaper — way out of the Google fight.
The original article contains 465 words, the summary contains 181 words. Saved 61%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
