Thread

1. ocd · 1790861971 · focus · HN ↗

   I'm not a business guy, but I think I would be very worried if I created any opening (even on the very long term) for competition to justify itself being built up to meet demand (or national security requirements of other countries) on an industry I mostly control, because I prioritized extremely high prices for a few years that might have the effect of changing the arithmetic for potential competitors that wouldn't have done it before.

   It makes me consider whether there would be retaliation in later years against the US intellectual property system in countries other than China. While RAM is a tangible product, the areas it serves aren't really.

   1. wewewedxfgdf · 1790862827 · focus · HN ↗

      There is 3 companies that make memory - they ALL want to keep memory prices high for as long as possible.

      1. adrian_b · 1790864677 · focus · HN ↗

         For now, there are only 3 that matter, but the reason is purely because the US government has sabotaged their competition as soon as it became apparent that the incumbents would lose market share.

         Without what the US government did and still does, the prices of memory would have never increased so much and all the world would not have been forced to pay so much for memory.

         1. Lumich · 1790878584 · focus · HN ↗

            « Without what the US government did and still does, the prices of memory would have never increased so much and all the world would not have been forced to pay so much »

            If that is true (and given the reasons you provide below, and the general quality of your commenting, I assume it is) then the situation is similar (if less militarized) to that of the oil sector, where the cost increase is likely higher by perhaps three orders of magnitude.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.