#silicone watches

[spockvarietyhour]

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Keir Starmer appoints Jeff Bezos as his “first buddy”

Picks and Shovels is a new, standalone technothriller starring Marty Hench, my two-fisted, hard-fighting, tech-scam-busting forensic accountant. You can pre-order it on my latest Kickstarter, which features a brilliant audiobook read by Wil Wheaton.

Turns out Donald Trump isn't the only world leader with a tech billionaire "first buddy" who gets to serve as an unaccountable, self-interested de facto business regulator. UK PM Keir Starmer has just handed the keys to the British economy over to Jeff Bezos.

Oh, not literally. But here's what's happened: the UK's Competitions and Markets Authority, an organisation charged with investigating and punishing tech monopolists (like Amazon) has just been turned over to Doug Gurr, the guy who used to run Amazon UK.

This is – incredibly – even worse than it sounds. Marcus Bokkerink, the outgoing head of the CMA, was amazing, and he had charge over the CMA's Digital Markets Unit, the largest, best-staffed technical body of any competition regulator, anywhere in the world. The DMU uses its investigatory powers to dig deep into complex monopolistic businesses like Amazon, and just last year, the DMU was given new enforcement powers that would let it custom-craft regulations to address tech monopolization (again, like Amazon's).

But it's even worse. The CMA and DMU are the headwaters of a global system of super-effective Big Tech regulation. The CMA's deeply investigated reports on tech monopolists are used as the basis for EU regulations and enforcement actions, and these actions are then re-run by other world governments, like South Korea and Japan:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/10/an-injury-to-one/#is-an-injury-to-all

The CMA is the global convener and ringleader in tech antitrust, in other words. Smaller and/or poorer countries that lack the resources to investigate and build a case against US Big Tech companies have been able to copy-paste the work of the CMA and hold these companies to account. The CMA invites (or used to invite) all of these competition regulators to its HQ in Canary Wharf for conferences where they plan global strategy against these monopolists:

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/cma-data-technology-and-analytics-conference-2022-registration-308678625077

Firing the guy who is making all this happening and replacing him with Amazon's UK boss is a breathtaking display of regulatory capture by Starmer, his business secretary Jonathan Reynolds, and his exchequer, Rachel Reeves.

But it gets even worse, because Amazon isn't just any tech monopolist. Amazon is a many-tentacled kraken built around an e-commerce empire. Antitrust regulators elsewhere have laid bare how Amazon uses that retail monopoly to take control over whole economies, while raising prices and crushing small businesses.

To understand Amazon's market power, first you have to understand "monopsonies" – markets dominated by buyers (monopolies are markets dominated by sellers – Amazon is both a monopolist and a monopsonist). Monopsonies are far more dangerous than monopolies, because they are easier to establish and easier to defend against competitors. Say a single retailer accounts for 30% of your sales: there isn't a business in the world that can survive an overnight 30% drop in sales, so that 30% market share might as well be 100%. Once your order is big enough that canceling it would bankrupt your supplier, you have near-total control over that supplier.

Amazon boasts about this. They call it "the flywheel": Amazon locks in shoppers (by getting them to prepay for a year's worth of shipping in advance, via Prime). The fact that a business can't sell to a large proportion of households if it's not on Amazon gives Amazon near-total power over that business. Amazon uses that power to demand discounts and charge junk fees to the businesses that rely on it. This allows it to lower prices, which brings in more customers, which means that even more businesses have to do business with Amazon to stay afloat:

https://vimeo.com/739486256/00a0a7379a

That's Amazon's version, anyway. In reality, it's a lot scuzzier. Amazon doesn't just demand deep discounts from its suppliers – it demand unsustainable discounts from them. For example, Amazon targeted small publishers with a program called the "Gazelle Project." Jeff Bezos told his negotiators to bring down these publishers "the way a cheetah would pursue a sickly gazelle":

https://archive.nytimes.com/bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/22/a-new-book-portrays-amazon-as-bully/

The idea was to get a bunch of cheap books for the Kindle to help it achieve critical mass, at the expense of driving these publishers out of business. They were a kind of disposable rocket stage for Amazon.

Deep discounts aren't the only way that Amazon feeds off its suppliers: it also lards junk-fee atop junk-fee. For every pound Amazon makes from its customers, it rakes in 45-51p in fees:

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

Now, just like there's no business that can survive losing 30% of its sales overnight, there's also no business that can afford to hand 45-51% of its gross margin to a retailer. For businesses to survive at all on Amazon, they have to jack their prices up – way up. However, Amazon has an anticompetitive deal called "most favoured nation status" that forces suppliers to sell their goods on Amazon at the same price as they sell them elsewhere (even from their own stores). So when companies raise their prices in order to pay ransom to Amazon, they have to raise their prices everywhere. Far from being a force for low prices, Amazon makes prices go up everywhere, from the big Tesco's to the corner shop:

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

Amazon makes so much money off of this scam that it doesn't have to pay anything to ship its own goods – the profits from overcharging merchants for "fulfillment by Amazon" pay for all the shipping, on everything Amazon sells:

https://cdn.ilsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/AmazonMonopolyTollbooth-2023.pdf

Amazon competes with its own sellers, but unlike those sellers, it doesn't have to pay a 45-51% rake – and it can make its competitor-customers cover the full cost of its own shipping! On top of that, Amazon maintains the pretense that its headquarters are in Luxembourg, the tax- and crime-haven, and pays a fraction of the taxes that British businesses pay to HMRC (and that's not counting the 45-51% tax they pay to Jeff Bezos's monoposony).

That's not the only way that Amazon unfairly competes with British businesses, though: Amazon uses its position as a middleman between buyers and sellers to identify the most successful products sold by its own customers. Then it copies those products and sells them below the original inventor's costs (because it gets free shipping, pays no tax, and doesn't have to pay its own junk fees), and drives those businesses into the ground. Even Jeff "Project Gazelle" Bezos seems to understand that this is a bad look, which is why he perjured himself to the American Congress when he was questioned under oath about it:

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58961836

Amazon then places its knockoff products above the original goods on its search results page. Amazon makes $38b selling off placement on these search pages, and the top results for an Amazon search aren't the best matches for your query – they're the ones that pay the most. On average, Amazon's top result for a search is 29% more expensive than the best match on the site. On average, the top row of results is 25% more expensive than the best match on the site. On average, Amazon buries the best result for your search 17 places down the results page:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/11/03/subprime-attention-rent-crisis/#euthanize-rentiers

Amazon, in other words, acts like the business regulator for the economies it dominates. It decides what can be sold, and at what prices. It decides whose products come up when you search, and thus which businesses deserve to live and which ones deserve to die. An economy dominated by Amazon isn't a market economy – it's a planned economy, run by Party Secretary Bezos for the benefit of Amazon's shareholders.

Now, there is a role for a business regulator, because some businesses really don't deserve to live (because they sell harmful products, engage in deceptive practices, etc). The UK has a regulator that's in charge of this stuff: the Competition and Markets Authority, which is now going to be run by Jeff Bezos's hand-picked UK Amazon boss. That means that Amazon is now both the official and the unofficial central planner of the UK economy, with a free hand to raise prices, lower quality, and destroy British businesses, while hiding its profits in Luxemourg and starving the exchequer of taxes.

The "first buddy" role that Keir Starmer just handed over to Jeff Bezos is, in every way, more generous than the first buddy deal Trump gave Elon Musk.

Starmer's government claims they're doing this for "growth" but Amazon isn't a force for growth, it's force for extraction. It is a notorious underpayer of its labour force, a notorious tax-cheat, and a world-beating destroyer of local economies, local jobs, and local tax bases. Contrary to Amazon's own self-mythologizing, it doesn't deliver lower prices – it raises prices throughout the economy. It doesn't improve quality – this is a company whose algorithmic recommendation system failed to recognize that an "energy drink" was actually its own drivers' bottled piss, which it then promoted until it was the best-selling energy drink on the platform:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/10/20/release-energy/#the-bitterest-lemon

There's a reason that the UK, the EU, Japan and South Korea found it so easy to collaborate on antitrust cases against American companies: these are all countries whose competition law was rewritten by American technocrats during the Marshall Plan, modeled on the US's own laws. The bedrock of US competition law is 1890's Sherman Act, whose author, Senator John Sherman, declared that:

If we will not endure a King as a political power we should not endure a King over the production, transportation, and sale of the necessaries of life. If we would not submit to an emperor we should not submit to an autocrat of trade with power to prevent competition and to fix the price of any commodity.

https://pluralistic.net/2022/02/20/we-should-not-endure-a-king/

Jeff Bezos is the autocrat of trade that John Sherman warned us about, 135 years ago. And Keir Starmer just abdicated in his favour.

Check out my Kickstarter to pre-order copies of my next novel, Picks and Shovels!

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/01/22/autocrats-of-trade/#dingo-babysitter

Image: UK Parliament/Maria Unger (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Keir_Starmer_2024.jpg

CC BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en

--

Steve Jurvetson (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jeff_Bezos%27_iconic_laugh.jpg

CC BY 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/deed.en

[andtenderly]

jarrich even in 2024 is something that can be so personal because it’s like you are the face of my escape from everything that has wronged me. i do not know my own birthday. my skeleton is my body and my body is my home so i’m never alone, but looking at you makes me feel more at home than any house i have ever lived in. i knew we would be forever when i tucked your dangling foot back into bed while you were sleeping. you wrong me again and again but your presence is my salvation regardless. i am happiest when taking care of you. i will do your nails how i learned on the street as you tell me about all of your worries. please need me how i need you. i tell you i love you and you look horrified. we will always find each other.

[airy-mod]

– Computer Faire, 1977

[novationnova]

Rediscovered my favorite actor, Jimmy O Yang, again!! Started and finished Interior Chinatown on Hulu in like the same week and made some fanart. Also drew some sketches of Dr Chan Kaifang from Space Force and Jian Yang from Silicon Valley (I only watch Space Force but my grandma loves Silicon Valley). Anyway that's where I've been.

[downtherabbitholewithlucy]

Wes Borland: The Human Emoji

[millenniumofnights]

Pandora and Bianca dominating and tag teaming Marius until he’s sobbing and utterly incapable of yapping

I mean- Hey, I’m Monica. I’m kinda new here. 👉🏼👈🏼

[mattpearson]

@pscentral​ event 26: minimalism

SILICON VALLEY (2014 - 2019) TOP 10 RATED EPISODES ON IMDB insp (1, 2)

[strawberryblondebutch]

Walter Pup hat is HERE

[radiocmyk]

People think horror comedy is bad because people think horror comedy is EASY. Way too many people think you make a good horror comedy by throwing some cheap one-liners in between the gore or have the deaths be in goofy ways and a monster that looks stupid. No motherfucker. A good horror comedy is a HORROR COMEDY. Not just horror and also comedy. The comedy should have layers of dread underneath. The horror should have subsurface humor. There should be no tonal whiplash because the sinister and the ridiculous should only serve to complement and amplify each other. The joke that comes after the scare (or vice versa) should feel natural because the tone should allow room for both. And it can only do that if there's an understanding of what makes horror good, what makes comedy good, AND what makes the two genres both different and similar. A good horror comedy should have you asking where exactly the actual line even is. A good horror comedy should have you realizing it depends on the person and there might not even be one.

[bisonstraps]

Gold Brown Italian Vegan Leather Watch Strap

Italian Oil Wax Calfskin: the upper leather (oil wax leather) is sourced from Italy, which use a traditional process of vegetable tanning, resulting in straps with a distinct appearance and unmatched durability, breathable and comfortable

Vegetable Tanning: the vegetable tanning process results in colors that are rich and deep in natural tones and the strap evolve over time, absorbing the traces of our lives, becoming more unique

Size Selection: Available in 18mm,20mm, 22mm widths, compatible with most traditional or smart watch, please accurately measure your watch lug width then select the right size. Size =Band Width = Watch Lug Width

Band Length: 80mm and 120mm (not counting the buckle); Thickness: 3.8mm. This strap is a regular length, suitable for wrists of 5.9" to 8" (15cm-20cm)

Package Included: 1 watch strap, 1 installation tool and 4 spring bars in per package. If any questions, please feel free to contact us, we will try our best to satisfy every customer

[shalomniscient]

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Learning from Silicon Valley Bank's apologists

My weird hobby is taking pictures of signs, especially “vernacular” signs, handwritten and odd. The best kinds of signs tell you what other people think you are thinking, or what you don’t understand. I’ve nabbed over 4,600 of ‘em:

https://www.flickr.com/search/?user_id=37996580417%40N01&sort=date-taken-desc&text=sign&view_all=1

If you’d like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here’s a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/03/15/mon-dieu-une-guillotine/#ceci-nes-pas-une-bailout

I think you learn more about the world by delving into others’ misconceptions than you learn from their factual understandings. Facts are out there for anyone to discover, but when someone inadvertently affords you a glimpse into their wrong beliefs, well, that’s something that can’t be learned in any other way.

Which brings me to the apologists for Silicon Valley Bank, who are busily churning out incredibly revealing bad takes about why bailing out SVB was the right thing to do, and why you’re wrong to call it a bailout, and why all of this is Very Regrettable but nevertheless The Right Thing To Do.

Here’s a terrible reason to support the SVB bailout: because if we let all the tech companies who did business with it fail, you might not be able to get into your house anymore after your smart-lock fails because the cloud service it depends on cuts off the startup that made it because their bank account went up in a puff of smoke:

https://www.wired.com/story/silicon-valley-bank-collapse-fallout/

Look, if you think the fact that my Internet of Shit door-lock failed because the company that designed it made no plan to let me into my house if they went out of business would make me sympathetic to that company, you are out of your fucking mind. If that happened to me, it would make me want to tear the lock out of my door, hunt down the CEO of the company that made it, set the lock on fire, and throw it through their front window.

Here’s another terrible reason to support the bailout: if SVB’s depositors lose their money, every other large depositor will flock to Morganstanley, on the theory that Morganstanley is too big to fail, and will behave just as recklessly, but will never be allowed to go under precisely because they are so structurally important:

https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2023/03/can-the-svb-crisis-be-solved-in-the-longer-run.html

I’m pretty sure this is true! It doesn’t make me want to support an SVB bailout though — it makes me want to break up Morganstanley, regulate the everlasting shit out of the resulting fragments, and create massive public banks that are run by and for their depositors, insulated from the reckless, speculative conduct of these maniacs who keep crashing the world economy:

https://prospect.org/economy/2023-03-15-federal-reserve-banking-public-option/

One more very bad reason to support the bailout: “it’s not a bailout.” The Biden administration wants us to know that SVB’s creditors and shareholders aren’t being bailout here, just the depositors — everyday folken with more than $250,000 in liquid cash in their checking accounts. Whomst amongst us can’t relate to that?

https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/first-read/biden-administrations-message-dont-call-bailout-rcna74628

There are a lot of totally normal people who would suffer if not for this bailout — the people who clean the toilets or answer the customer-service calls for tech companies aren’t stock-option-fattened bros in Patagoinia vests. They’re totally normal working people who took no risks and bear no responsibility for the failure of SVB.

But come on. Does anyone seriously believe that the absolute fucking ghouls who came out against a barely-there student debt cancellation as a precursor to literal Stalinist gulags are advocating for endless billions for SVB’s depositors because of the janitors?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattnovak/2023/03/12/larry-summers-says-now-is-not-the-time-for-moral-hazard-lectures-about-bailouts/

Listen: people aren’t pissed off about the bailout because they want startups to fail. They’re pissed off because they are living in the century of “socialism for the rich and rugged individualism for the poor”:

https://www.reddit.com/r/LateStageCapitalism/comments/iaqdrl/as_martin_luther_king_jr_said_in_1968_this/

They’re pissed off because the Treasury official who presided over the theft of millions of houses by corrupt, bailed-out banks after the 2008 Great Financial Crisis and then wrote academic articles defending the decision to “foam the runways” for the banks with everyday Americans’ homes is about to join the Federal Reserve Board:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/03/06/personnel-are-policy/#janice-eberly

They’re pissed off because Biden reneged on his promise for muscular, sweeping StudentDebtCancellation in favor of a self-immolating weaksauce version that would barely dent the crushing financial devastation faced by millions of young people:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/05/03/utopia-of-rules/#in-triplicate

Only to have the illegitimate dotards of the Supreme Court make even that symbolic gesture moot:

https://www.npr.org/2023/02/28/1159606491/student-loan-forgiveness-supreme-court

(As to what Biden should do about it? The same thing Trump would: Pack the court. Pack the fucking court. Pack it. Just do it. The court’s legitimacy could not sink any lower. There is no downside. Do it.)

The rage at well-capitalized startups being rescued from unearned distress isn’t motivated by a free-floating techlash rage at “bros.” It’s rage born of the fact that young Americans are being put on the hook for their dead parents’ debts:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/05/19/zombie-debt/#damnation

There is infinite political will and bottomless appetite for money creation when VC-backed companies face distress, but when the death of your parents is followed by years of brutal debt-collector armbreakers chasing you from phone number to phone number, it’s just crickets.

There’s no question that the SVB failure resulted from a series of extremely technical phenomena that offer a fascinating peek into the behind-the-scenes forces that power an economy built on private banking and home ownership as the sole means of intergenerational wealth transfer.

But the fact that this is a complicated circumstance doesn’t mean that laypeople don’t have a right to be furious about it. We should all be suspicious of the inevitabilist narratives of the “experts” who claim that none of this could have been avoided:

https://prospect.org/economy/2023-03-15-qa-daniel-davies-venture-capitalist-bailout/

When finance “experts” tell you that you have no business opining on this highly technical matter, just remember that these are the same experts who were paid fantastic gobs of cash to certify that all these failing banks are just groovy, mere weeks ago:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/kpmg-faces-scrutiny-for-audits-of-svb-and-signature-bank-42dc49dd

Those same experts were caught bribing government officials to help their top staff cheat…on ethics exams (!!!!!!!!!!!!):

https://pluralistic.net/2021/06/04/aaronsw/#crooked-ref

Even if it turns out to be true that the kind of risk that SVB was exposed to is an inevitable consequence of an economy built on private banking and housing as an asset, rather than a human right:

https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/banking-in-very-uncertain-times/

Remember that those choices are not inevitable. The decision to make housing the primary driver of intergenerational wealth transfer is both recent and very, very stupid:

https://gen.medium.com/the-rents-too-damned-high-520f958d5ec5

Private banking doesn’t need to be an unregulated free-for-all, nor does it have to be the only game in town:

https://publicbankla.com/

As SVB’s apologists insist that tech startups should be preserved lest our IoT gadgets brick themselves, or that SVB should be preserved so that the Morganstanley cancer doesn’t creep into more of our social organs, or that bailing out SVB is acceptable because it’s to defend elite startup founders, not ultrawealthy bank owners, they are missing the fucking point.

But they’re missing it in a useful way. Like any weird sign, these bad takes teach us a lot about how the people who utter them model our own beliefs. They think that people like smart gadgets. They think that we don’t want the finance sector reformed. They think that we’re motivated by schadenfreude, which means that they also think we’ve forgotten about broken student debt promises, about robosigning and the foreclosure epidemic. They think we are fully onboard with rugged individualism for the poor and socialism for the rich.

These bad takes reveal a profoundly out-of-touch elite, the spiritual descendants of the French aristos who went to the guillotine with sincerely baffled hearts, unable to imagine why anyone would be this angry at them.

Upton Sinclair said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” It’s even more difficult to get a one percenter to understand something when the system that insulates them from the endless, spiraling economic wreckage of our new feudal economy is on the line.

Next Monday (Mar 20), I’m doing a remote talk for the Ostrom Workshop’s Beyond the Web Speaker Series.

[Image ID: A sign reading 'Pull on handle to open closet. Handle is rigid and doesn't turn.']

[novationnova]

Y'all seem to enjoy silicon valley and I had free time in study hall

[a-dotrivenitupontop]

sillycon valley :3

[jackalspine]

tricked and deceived into reading 100 chapters of svsss