#Anti-Competitive | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

boredtechnologist · 2 months

Text

OPINION: NVIDIA's Anti-Competitive Move: The Restriction on Third-Party "Translation" Software

Opinion posting: In my opinion, a recent update to their terms of service, NVIDIA has taken a controversial step by restricting third-party use of its CUDA libraries for use with "translation" software, most notably targeting projects like ZLUDA. This decision by the GPU giant has sparked considerable debate within the tech community, with many voicing concerns over its potential anti-competitive implications.

CUDA, NVIDIA's proprietary parallel computing platform and application programming interface (API), has long been a cornerstone for developers utilizing NVIDIA GPUs for various computational tasks, from scientific simulations to deep learning algorithms. However, with the rise of alternative platforms and software, the tech industry has witnessed a growing demand for compatibility and interoperability across different ecosystems.

One such demand has been for tools that enable the translation of CUDA code to run on non-NVIDIA hardware, effectively breaking down vendor lock-in and fostering a more open and diverse computing environment. Projects like ZLUDA have emerged to address this need, allowing CUDA applications to run on AMD GPUs, for instance, thus providing users with greater flexibility and choice in their hardware selection.

By imposing restrictions on the usage of its CUDA libraries with such translation software, NVIDIA is effectively limiting the accessibility and interoperability of its technology, thereby stifling competition and innovation in the GPU market. This move not only undermines the principles of fair competition but also raises concerns about the dominance of NVIDIA within the industry.

This isn't the first time a tech industry leader has been accused of engaging in anti-competitive behavior. Historical examples abound, with some of the most prominent cases including:

Microsoft vs. Netscape: In the late 1990s, Microsoft faced antitrust scrutiny for bundling its Internet Explorer web browser with the Windows operating system, thus stifling competition from Netscape Navigator and other browsers. This led to a landmark legal battle and ultimately resulted in Microsoft being found guilty of anticompetitive practices.

Intel's Anti-Competitive Practices: Intel has faced multiple allegations of anti-competitive behavior over the years, including accusations of offering rebates and incentives to PC manufacturers in exchange for exclusive deals and favoring its own products over competitors' in certain markets. These actions have led to investigations by regulatory authorities in various countries and hefty fines imposed on the company.

Google's Search Dominance: Google has been under scrutiny for leveraging its dominant position in the search engine market to favor its own services and products over competitors' offerings. This has resulted in numerous antitrust investigations and legal challenges, with regulators raising concerns about Google's impact on competition and consumer choice.

In each of these cases, the actions of the industry leader in question were seen as detrimental to competition and innovation, ultimately resulting in regulatory intervention and legal consequences. Similarly, NVIDIA's decision to restrict third-party "translation" software could be seen as a move aimed at preserving its dominance in the GPU market, potentially at the expense of consumer choice and innovation.

In conclusion, NVIDIA's recent update to its terms of service regarding the usage of CUDA libraries with third-party translation software raises serious concerns about anti-competitive behavior within the tech industry. By limiting interoperability and stifling competition, NVIDIA risks undermining the principles of fair competition and innovation that are essential for a healthy and vibrant technology ecosystem. As such, it is imperative for regulatory authorities to closely monitor the situation and take appropriate action to ensure a level playing field for all participants in the GPU market.

#NVIDIA #anti-competitive #ZLUDA #AMD #opinion

0 notes

platformdecentral · 3 months

Text

Spotify's CEO, Daniel Ek says Apple's EU DMA announcement is "at best vague and misleading"

Today, Spotify’s CEO, Daniel Ek, penned a blog post expressing his criticism of the alterations Apple has made to its app ecosystem in the European Union under the Digital Markets Act. He accused Apple of presenting “a new plan that is a complete and total farce” under the guise of “compliance and concessions.” Ek asserts that Apple doesn’t believe “the rules apply to them,” and he anticipates…

View On WordPress

#Anti-Competitive #Antitrust #App Store #Apple #Apple App Store #iOS #iOS App Store #Market Choice #Market Competition #Spotify

0 notes

moonlit-ripples · 7 months

Text

#own post #pokémon #dont take this as anti competitive btw #i love love love the bullshit that goes down in it

6K notes · View notes

carlos55inz · 3 months

Text

we need to have the conversation of how charles fans treat his teammates without falling into the accusatory zone that we want to harm charles by having this conversation.

i mean charles no harm, but it is something that is getting extremely out of hand and it needs to be talked about. some charles fans have gotten too freely with being cruel to others drivers.

people used to call sebastian vettel a CORPSE. yes, scuderia ferrari screwed him. yes, everyone loves sebastian vettel again NOW (because he is far away from it and free from this hell) but back in 19/20? charles fans, mainly on twitter, made his life miserable. he couldn’t win. he couldn’t make anyone happy. if he won, he was taking something from charles that belonged to charles rightfully. it he lost, he was old and bad and should retire already and this sport wasn’t for him. he wasn’t a team player. he didn’t care about ferrari. he wanted to screw charles over.

if you just got here, if carlos is your first experience of how charles’ teammates are treated, let me tell you. everything that is being said about carlos has already been said about sebastian. and it is crazy for some people to understand that because everyone loves sebastian again, so you can’t even imagine what he went throught.

and i’m sorry for generalizing all of charles fans, im a charles fan, but it is something we need to stop and look at and talk about. how long will we let it go. how long until it starts to happen to lewis hamilton, of all people. how long until they dismiss his victories and say he is old and should give up of this sport so charles can win.

and you know one of the worst part? charles loves to race. every time he had to fight for it, he loved it. when he and carlos race in that track, he comes out with a big smile and talking about how he loves to race carlos. how this is real racing. he loves to fight for it. to prove himself. to have to sweat for it.

all while his fans try to make everyone just bow down their heads and give him things in a plate, already chewed and easy to get. as if he would like that. as if he can’t prove himself worth otherwise. as if he isn’t good enough to fight for it.

#ceu talking #carlos sainz #charles leclerc #sebastian vettel #lewis hamilton #scuderia ferrari #i might just be tired of this circle repeating itself without anyone being hold accountable #i had to sit back and watch as sebastian vettel got fucking demolished on twt by some charles fans #i had to read all that after being so excited that my favorite driver would be in my favorite team!! it was the dream!!!#i had to see all the horrendous things people talk about carlos #and they are destroying the sport really because you can’t fight anymore with all you have to be on the first #this is a competitive sport and people are being cussed at for being (check notes) competitive #these people wouldn’t stand A DAY of sebmark brocedes and they would DIE if they saw classic f1 #prosenna? those people would COMBUST #anyway #wathever #i’m just pissed off #i might not even be making sense #is easy to ride behind a ‘anti-wathever’ tag and talk the most horrendous things isn’t it #had to see on twitter some charles fans already talking shit abt LEWIS HAMILTON

254 notes · View notes

sapphic-agent · 18 days

Text

"If I was surprised at anything, it may have been that it seemed like people were less willing to let her make mistakes than they were with Aang."

I hate Bryke's guts, but the one thing I will agree with him (Bryan) on is this.

I've gotten heat from Aang stans for saying this, but for me Korra will always be a better written character for me. Not because Aang's childish and optimistic and naive or anything like that. That doesn't matter to me. Hell, it's not even for his actions during DOBS or EIP or Kataang. Sure, those things aren't great, but they aren't the issue with his character.

It's not about Aang's actions, it's about how Aang's actions are treated by the narrative.

This is nothing new obviously, I've said this before. Many times. Aang kissing Katara in EIP is treated as him messing up his chances with her, not because he forced something on her she didn't want. The kiss in DOBS doesn't even come up again in the show (and when it did in the comics, Aang blew up and nearly melted her face off so-). I've spoken enough about his holier-than-thou attitude in TSR too and how his message of forgiveness is perpetuated as the right one.

It's one thing that is 100% better in LOK; Korra is held accountable for her actions, by the narrative, the other characters, and herself. A big part of LOK is Korra acknowledging her actions and making the effort to change and be better.

A great counter to Aang repeatedly crossing boundaries with Katara is in Reunion when she warns Asami about trusting Hiroshi and Asami calls her out on giving unsolicited advice. Korra immediately backs off and tries to apologize when she sees that she upset her.

Now compare this to Aang's behavior in TSR or EIP.

And before anyone says it, I know Korra's older. I also know Asami reconnecting with her father is different than Katara wanting to kill Yon Rha. I get all of that.

But honestly? That doesn't matter to me. Because when you're talking about fictional characters- especially character progression and development for the protagonist- addressing flaws is important. Accountability is important. Especially when it comes to how they treat the people around them (love interests like Asami and Korra probably being the most important).

This is what solidifies Korra's character development as being better than Aang's for me.

However, I do think it's because of this framing (and the fact that she's a woman, but shh) that Korra gets more hate. Her flaws being addressed also means that they're constantly apparent. The audience is always aware of them. Whereas Aang's worse actions tended to be brushed over or excused. Or the context of those mistakes were maneuvered to make the audience feel bad for him instead of the one affected by his actions (EIP EIP EIP EIP).

So yes, Bryan, people were more willing to let Aang make mistakes because you and your bestie failed to actually address them

79 notes · View notes

yuri-for-businesswomen · 1 month

Text

we need more feminist horror

#there is so much potential there #rambling #the beauty industry… anti ageing… dieting….#female gender roles as a demon haunting you…#the prison of femininity…#menstruation pregnancy abortion as body horror #subversing horror tropes of female exploitation and male violence…#men as monsters… the patriarchy as a haunted house… competition between women as curse…#or just female slashers and serial killers who are not sexy for the female gaze #liberal feminism encouraging ‚sex work‘ as a cult #as some sort of commentary #WITCHES… the last girl becoming ‚evil‘ but what really is evil…#intergenerational female trauma…#male religion > occult horror #zombie as symbolism of trauma…#MOTHER DAUGHTER RELATIONSHIPS

87 notes · View notes

genericpuff · 5 months

Text

yeah i don't think this is the kind of advertising rachel needs right now-

#again rachel doesn't really have anything to do directly with this situation BUT #cait still included LO as one of the series she inflated the rating of with 5 stars alongside her own book #correlation doesn't equal causation #but it's still really telling that these are the kinds of works cait simps for to the point of RATING THEM HIGHLY IN HER REVIEW BOMBING #when they're really so problematic and controversial at their core #and are laced with so much casual misogyny and racism #the latter of which cait has a LOT of #though 'casual' racism is really understating it #she promoted herself from casual to competitive ranked racism #and yeah that includes touch of darkness as well which she also rated high with her alts and it's literally just LO: The Wattpad Novel #cait corrain #oh and sidenote #her 'apology' was not a real apology at ALL lmao #it literally opened up IMMEDIATELY with her using her medication as an excuse #for RACISM #watch out y'all you don't wanna take the depression meds that come with racism as a side effect /s #lore olympus critical #lo critical #anti lore olympus

138 notes · View notes

shinobicyrus · 4 months

Text

Hey, yanno how Climate Change is a real thing that is tangibly, at this moment, affecting our world?

Well it turns out, the wealthy and their investment firms have been seeing the mounting evidence that oil companies have had for decades and are slowly starting to think more long-term about their portfolios in the face of rising sea levels, more extreme weather, and the myriad of ways climate crises are affecting...well. Everything. Maybe this means they invest more into sustainability, green energy, building more resilient infrastructure, or carbon offsets. Some of it, of course, is simple corporate greenwashing, but there are those that are taking this trend and packaging it into something called ESG (Environmental, Social, and corporate Governance).

Now some people would say this is predictable, even sensible. Just the good ol’ Free Market(tm) rationally responding to market forces and a changing world.

But those people would be fools! Insidious fools! For conservative sorcerers have come out with a new cursed phrase to explain this new market trend: Woke Investing.

What makes this investing “woke?” Well, much like how conservatives normally flounder when trying to define a word they stole from black people, “Woke Investing” essentially just means any kind of capital investment that they, the fossil fuel billionaire class and their sycophants, don’t personally profit from.

One of these aforementioned sycophants is Andy Puzder, conservative commentator, fellow at The Heritage Foundation, and former fast-food CEO. He calls this kind of so-called woke investing “socialism in sheep’s clothing,” further explaining in leaked audio of a closed-door meeting:

“My father's generation's challenge was the Nazis, who, by the way, were, of course, very proud socialists[citation fucking needed]. The challenge of my generation was the communists, who were, of course, very committed socialists. The challenge of your generation is ESG investing, and it's more insidious than communism or the Nazis.”(source)

You heard it here first, folks. Not investing as much in fossil fuels is more insidious than the Third Fucking Reich.

As usual, the Heritage Foundation is putting their petro-chemical donor’s money where their mouth is. Bills are being proposed to blacklist banks that don’t invest in key state industries, such as West Virginia coal or Texas oil. Fourteen states have already passed bills to restrict ESG-type investing, with Florida Governor Ron “Bullies Kids for Wearing Masks” Desantis leading the charge.

In other words, Climate Denial has reached such a point that so-called Free Market Conservatives who claim to hate big government are trying to make it illegal for banks, investment firms, and financial institutions to make any financial decisions that acknowledges Climate Change is real.

#of course ESG has also been used to describe any kind of internal corporate action #to increase diversity in the work place or implementing new anti-discrimination policies #(which are usually more performative than actually meaningful but that's a separate issue)#a Republican Presidential candidate #Vivek Ramaswamy #has even made ESG investing his personal bugbear #writing such books as 'Woke Inc' and warning of socially conscious investors ''forcing'' companies they invest in #to devote resources to environmental and social policies that are anathema to the right #which is just...a brand new invented crisis by a political movement #in constant need of a crisis to rally their base and justify for draconian legal controls #to favor certain industries and undercut their competition #all under the guise of red scare-type moral and economic panic #ESG #Woke Politics #Climate Change #Capitalism #Republicans #Investment

112 notes · View notes

bright-and-burning · 4 months

Text

i was pretty sure in-competition vs out-of-competition drug testing had different rules from following track and field doping scandals. and i was right! and then i accidentally dug a little too deep into doping regulations so. here's some fun info on anti-doping & motorsports (& how allowed doing drugs is) below the cut (you could perhaps call this a ~primer~ if you wanted)

i'm going off of the FIA's anti-doping regulations (appendix a to the international sporting code, this is from 2017 but it gets the gist across (and doesn't require a download). i checked it against the 2021 version and nothing i referenced changed significantly; click on the "appendix a" link here to download the 2021 version) and the world anti-doping code international standard prohibited list (link is to the 2024 list but i don't think things have changed very much over the years).

the appendix was only added to the international sporting code in 2010, so i can't speak to anything before then.

the FIA link is 69 pages long and also not an easy read BUT from what i can tell their testing works the same as any other international sport's (so if you're looking for a simpler read on the general process than the FIA's code, check out this wiki page on biological passports and the world anti-doping agency (WADA)'s pretty simple anti-doping process page here).

substances

the important part (to me, at least) is article 4: prohibited list and international standards. this is the bit that says what drugs you can and can't do.

it essentially boils down to "the WADA list applies. and also a few other things."

the few others things here are specifically alcohol and beta-blockers. alcohol for drunk driving reasons, beta-blockers because they lower heart rates and reduce tremors (they're banned in many sports that require high accuracy, like motorsports but also archery and golf).

the WADA list is broken down into two main parts: substances & methods prohibited at all times, and substances & methods prohibited in-competition

substances prohibited at all times

these are things like anabolic agents, peptide hormones, growth factors, beta-2 agonists, hormone and metabolic modulators, and diuretics and masking agents (you can explore more in depth here if you're interested).

basically, what i typically think of when i think of doping. the stereotype of bodybuilders taking steroids, you know. not the fun stuff.

substances prohibited in-competition

these are probably what people are more interested in hearing about (especially fic writers). these are stimulants, narcotics, cannabinoids, and glucocorticoids. i will admit to never having heard of glucocorticoids by that name before this (they are steroids used to treat asthma, inflammation, allergies, etc).

these include things like cocaine, adderall and other stimulants commonly used to treat adhd, ecstasy, weed, heroin, oxycodone, and so on.

once again see here for more info; if you're looking for something specific, go to the index and use what page it points you to as a guide. ecstasy, for example, is not listed by name as ecstasy on page 14 (stimulants prohibited in-competition but not out of competition), but if you look in the index, the ecstasy listing points you towards page 14 (where it's referred to by its 'chemical' name), marking it as a stimulant only prohibited in-competition. you might have to google your drug of choice to find other names for it.

in-competition, by the way, is defined as "the period commencing just before midnight (at 11:59 p.m.) on the day before a competition in which the Athlete is scheduled to participate until the end of the competition and the sample collection process." ie 11:59pm the night before right up to after you pee in the cup. assuming competition includes free practice, this period would be wednesday at 11:59pm to sunday after the race.

obviously you can get a therapeutic use exemption, where your doctor says "yeah they need this banned substance for this reason." it's more complicated than that, and there's a lot of paperwork and different agencies' approval involved, but that's the gist of it. this is, for example, how simone biles is allowed to take adhd medication despite those being prohibited in-competition.

the testing method itself isn't explicitly identified in the 2021 code, but it mentions blood and urine testing as options in a footnote. the 2017 code treats urine testing as the automatic option (and lays out the specifics of how that should occur quite explicitly), and blood testing as an alternative or optional addition.

different drugs stay in your system for different lengths of time. cocaine can show up on saliva & blood tests for up to two days, and on urine tests for up to three. weed's urine testing window can be as long as 30 days (depending on frequency of use). and so on. so risk levels vary!

sanctions stuff

you can get hit with sanctions for tampering with tests, evading tests, etc, but i'm gonna talk about specifically sanctions for testing positive because i feel like that's more interesting and relevant than going into sanctions for missing tests three times in twelve months (but if you are interested, read through the FIA's code).

they make special note of what they call "specified substances." these are substances that are "more like to have been consumed or used by an athlete for a purpose other than the enhancement of sport performance" aka fun drugs as opposed to performance enhancers. pretty much all of the in-competition banned ones are specified substances. notable exception here is cocaine. cocaine (and some other stimulants) are not specified substances. you can see which specific substances are specified here.

the definition of "specified substances" above is pretty much just used for sanctions reasons. it kind of helps determine who the burden of proof falls on.

nitty gritty sanctions stuff

the rest of this post gets into the nitty gritty of sanctions (feel free to skip this bit). motorsports has so few violations at the top level (like, to the point where anti-doping lab people are quoted as being genuinely amazed by how clean everyone is) that this kind of thing hasn't really played out (or at least, not since the FIA started working with WADA. or as far as i know). this is different from just about every other sport i've Ever paid any kind of attention to.

this part would honestly make a really solid flowchart. it makes for a pretty rough primer. it is so confusing, but hopefully i make it even a tiny bit more clear than the FIA's code.

there's quite a few cases here, and they're all kind of complicated:

if the violation involved a specified substance, the FIA has to prove it was intentional use to hit the violator with a four year "period of ineligibility," which i will refer to as a ban throughout for ease.

if the violation does not involve a specified substance, the athlete has to prove it wasn't an intentional use to avoid a four year ban.

the two cases above are what i see as the general cases. if a violation doesn't fall under any of the below cases, then it falls back into those. they're the "if not anything else, then these."

a violation for a substance only prohibited in-competition can be ruled not intentional if it is a specified substance and the athlete can prove that it was used out-of-competition, or if it is not a specified substance and the athlete can prove it was used out-of-competition in a context unrelated to performance.

aka (this is an extremely handwavey and flippant example for demonstration purposes only) if they test positive for ecstasy (specified substance), but they can prove they used it at the club for a good time, then it's not intentional. if they test positive for cocaine (not a specified substance), but they can prove they used it at the club and specifically for fun not for performance, then it's not intentional.

if intent isn't there, and none of the other options i go into below apply, you get a two year ban (as far as i can figure it out).

intentional use is specifically "meant to identify those athletes who cheat," basically doing it knowing it was a rule violation/carried a risk of being a rule violation and disregarding the risk (paraphrased from the FIA).

if the violation involves a substance of abuse as specified by WADA here, and the driver can establish that the use occurred out-of-competition and wasn't related to performance, then they get a three month ban. furthermore, if the driver completes an FIA-approved substance of abuse treatment program, then that ban will be reduced to one month.

if the violation involves a substance of abuse and it occurred in-competition, but the driver can prove it wasn't related to performance, then the violation'll be considered not intentional, and is therefore (as far as i can tell) subject to a two year ban.

if the driver can prove they bear no fault or negligence (literally Zero), then whatever ban they would've gotten will go away. this is REALLY hard though; the document states that it "will only apply in exceptional circumstances, for example, where a Driver could prove that, despite all due care, he or she was sabotaged by a competitor."

Conversely, it says that this no fault case wouldn't apply if: a) they consumed a mislabeled/contaminated vitamin or supplement (drivers are responsible for what they ingest), b) their personal trainer/physician gave it to them without explaining what it was (drivers are responsible for their choice of medical personnel), c) sabotage of their food or drink "by a spouse, coach or other person within the driver’s circle of associates (drivers are responsible for what they ingest and for the conduct of those persons to whom they entrust access to their food and drink)." In these scenarios, however, they could potentially use the no significant fault or negligence cases outlined directly below.

if the violation involves a specified substance (but not a substance of abuse), and the driver can prove no significant fault or negligence, then the consequences will be somewhere between a reprimand and a two year ban depending on how at fault they are.

if they can prove both no significant fault/negligence AND that the detected substance came from a contaminated product, then the consequences will be between somewhere between a reprimand and a two year ban depending on how at fault they are. (as an aside, i'm pretty sure this is the out that shelby houlihan tried to use when she tested positive for an anabolic steroid and blamed it on a pork burrito from a food truck).

to be able to use this out, the driver has to prove separately that a) the substance came from the contaminated product and b) they aren't significantly at fault.

these are, as far as i can tell, all of the potential violation cases the FIA's code has articles for. they align with other sports' regulatory bodies' rules, in my (limited) experience.

i hope this was at least a little interesting and informative! (it certainly was for me). thanks for reading :)

several disclaimers here: i make NO promises abt this being perfectly accurate bc it IS me interpreting the FIA's code. and this is nowhere near my area of expertise (i am not a doctor or a lawyer or anything else relevant to this. i am just a nerd with adhd and a whole lot of time). but i did my best ! and i think it's a solid stone's throw at accurate.

and also to be clear if they do coke in fic on thursday night or whatever for the plot or the vibes im still here for it. this is not me requiring pitch-perfect accuracy on doping violations in fic (and all of this info will probably drain out of my brain by saturday); it's (hopefully) a resource!

#hey friends adhd goes crazy. i found myself reading thru anti-doping regulations at like 1am and decided to be Productive about it #have fun go crazy do cocaine but only out-of-competition!#f1 primer #i Guess. i still hesitate to call it that.#mine #mine.primer

139 notes · View notes