| ▲ | Legend2440 5 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
Both things can be true. They want stable rules they can follow, which will limit their liability as long as they stay within them. They also would like those rules to be as restrictive as possible towards their competitors. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | autoexec 13 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
As restrictive as possible towards their competitors, while being as permissive as possible for them. Getting control of the regulation making process means they can make sure they don't end up too constrained anywhere that would hurt their bottom line. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | monocasa 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
They've spent close to $2T so far. At that scale the legal issues they've had are just the cost of doing business. I'm quite sure that if there wasn't the existential threat of a lack of a moat, they would not be pushing for regulations at all. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||