From an economic perspective the majority of those regulations destroy economic value and those companies are unlocking value by finding clever ways around them.

▲

gtowey 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No, they just shift the economic downsides to someone else so they can collect the difference. That's what I mean by arbitrage. Someone always pays the price, and now it's you and I.

	▲	holmesworcester 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		That's not always true. Regulations increase the cost of transacting and make ranges of transactions non-viable, just like a tax. So there is "dead weight loss", where transactions that would have been mutually beneficially and socially productive are eliminated by the regulation, and restored when somebody finds a loophole, restoring the individual and social benefit. The world is not zero sum!
	▲	Imustaskforhelp 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I agree, once they have bypassed regulations, they use that to essentially rent-seek from their monopoly/their unique position where the rent is paid by us public. Their behaviour is very rent-seeking imo and at moments like these, its best to remind us that even the father of Capitalism, Adam Smith didn't like landlords Had to search up some quotes from adam smith right now but here's a relevant one (imo) to this discussion: "[the landlord leaves the worker] with the smallest share with which the tenant can content himself without being a loser, and the landlord seldom means to leave him any more." - Adam smith

▲

Natfan 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

i can find clever ways around d crippling debt, its called robbing a bank at gunpoint

▲

Imustaskforhelp 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I can't say this for the companies listed above but atleast within the realm of social media, they also want to bypass regulations and well, we all know how's it going.

On a long term, I do feel like there will be a drop in producitivity, thus destruction of economic value because of lack of enforcement of policies/such companies having reckless attitude about them.

Many of the products listed above actually seem to be very rent-seeking in my opinion (IIRC Someone on HN once said that from their personal experience talking to drivers, uber takes an approximate at the very least 40% cut or more)

(This might be a little off-topic?_ but one thing I think about tech regulations is that Facebook used to see if a young girl/minor girl took a selfie and then if they don't upload it, detect that she was insecure and then try to show them face beauty recommendations.

These girls can be our sisters/daughters fwiw. Facebook profits from insecurity/rage-bait and I would say that many social medias are the same as well, its just that the facebook example to me feels so eggregious and should be a uniting front for many to agree that there's a problem indeed.

You will be right when you say economical value is generated from profiting from insecurity/bypassing regulations but at what cost?