News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by qtplatypus on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @01:52AM (#22354015)
If you have regulations by revenue/employee count then the companies will restructure themselves to be below those thresholds.
Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by plutonicks on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @01:59AM (#22354043)
While true it is harder for companies to manipulate those 2 measures.

E.g. could Facebook run with 20 staff? Would Facebook and its shareholders be satisfied with 20m in annual revenue.

This scenario requires trade offs. My opinion is that monopoly, political and market dominance is a sub-optimal outcome

Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by quietbritishjim on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @02:17AM (#22354127)
It could certainly run with 20 staff – it would just spend a lot of money on license fees to a separate Facebook Services Inc that provides software and server administration services. This is similar to how companies avoid tax e.g. IKEA and Starbucks.

It could similarly avoid large profits but avoiding large revenues works be trickier. But I'm not an expert in these things, so maybe it's possible if you really know what you're doing.

Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by fastball on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @03:05AM (#22354295)
Then you just base it off of the number of employees overall in the parent company, not the number of employees in the subsidiary.
Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by quietbritishjim on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @04:21AM (#22354607)
The problem is, there's no legal distinction between a company that own shares but is "really" part of the same company, vs a completely separately company owning shares e.g. a pension fund.
Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by pyrale on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @03:59AM (#22354525)
Base it off user count too, problem solved.
Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by AnthonyMouse on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @02:02AM (#22354049)
That's easy to fix, just apply the rules only to companies having more than a hundred shareholders, and count shareholders of the parent for any subsidiary. Then you can't restructure Facebook to have less than a hundred shareholders because the number of shareholders is independent of the internal corporate structure.
Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by ascar on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @03:20AM (#22354359)
So any non-public company would be exempt?

There are multiple private multi billion dollar companies and I wouldn't be surprised, if they all have less than 100 shareholders.

Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by AnthonyMouse on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @02:14PM (#22359239)
> So any non-public company would be exempt?

All of the major tech companies are publicly traded.

Being publicly traded is also a major risk factor for hostile corporate behavior, because the top executives of private companies tend to be the owners and care more about the long-term than short-term profits, so it even makes sense as an explicit policy choice to regulate publicly traded companies more than private ones.

Re:Facebook asks for a moat of regulations it already meets by anticensor on Tuesday February 18, 2020 @06:54AM (#22355275)
Non-public non-cooperative ones actually. Having thousands of members is very common in cooperatives.