Here.
Not to be missed: Prof. Fox & Guests https://lnkd.in/d4V4JDmT - her writings inspired me as a young Student to get into competition policy.
Disagree
that "digital is shiny" and enforcers should deal with that "what
actually matters to people." It's shiny only if you avoid dealing with
the gritty basics, which few understand, which depend on specialised
knowledge, and which remain largely unexplained to that public the regulators should serve. The "communication
problem" is much larger and serious than the ten seconds needed to explain to a BBC radio audience at the breakfast table what a specific decision is about.
Continuing: AI Panel https://lnkd.in/euyBaNFH
Fully
agree with FSM on the fact that Google Search was a defeat because of
regulators - in the audience: don't look at me, I wasn't there yet etc.
Best intervention so far: Signal!
Google's
representative: "I also have children" - time flies. Then we learn that
GetTourGuide has "ebenfalls" two kids. And those families in the US
also have plenty of children and some good rulings supporting them. BTW,
is FSM about to say the number of children she has? Women: we don't do
it enough, apparently. FSM putting a rich debate into two narrowly
framed economic "theories of harm" sounds a bit reductionist at this
point. Unsurprisingly, Google is a big fan of Judge Mehta.
Give us the time, Google implores regulators! *Hear* hundreds of eyes in the room roll over.
No comments:
Post a Comment