On Daring Fireball, John Gruber published a piece entitled “Spotify’s Car Things to Be Rebranded as Car Bricks”. When he’s not talking about the EU, regulation, or an EU based company, Gruber often has an interesting perspective to share, but don’t get him started on anything EU or Spotify related! The whole article drips with grumpy sarcasm, but this last paragraph had me laugh out loud.

His article includes the following paragraph:

So let’s be clear about Spotify’s position: It’s OK — for them at least — to create a new hardware platform with no support at all for third-party software, but not OK for another company that owns its own music service to create a hardware platform that offers access to any and all competing services, but charges a commission for access, if that platform becomes popular. Once sufficiently popular, it’s only fair to allow Spotify access to those platforms free of charge, despite the fact that Spotify never allowed third parties access to their own platform at all, and built their own success through access to the App Store, at a time when the iPhone had single-digit market share for phones and low-teens market share among “smartphones”. Got it.

Yes, that is correct, John. Spotify’s device has no significant market share, and not being able to access it has no meaningful and negative impact on other streaming services. While the iPhone had a single-digit market share, there also was no regulation enforcing third-party access to iPhones—only market pressure.

But not to get stuck in this argument, I decided to dive a little deeper and ask AI for help, as it doesn’t care and has no emotions. I asked GPT 4o to analyze three of Gruber’s articles and some of the things he said on Dithering, and describe his behavior.^[1] While I don’t feel comfortable sharing the whole thing because it makes him look worse than I think is fair, here is most of it.

Note: I use the [text in brackets] method to mark modifications I made to the original. In this case, I removed something that felt too speculative for my taste and replaced it with a “The”.

Based on the articles you provided, here is a description of the person’s behavior and word choices:

The individual displays a consistent pattern of criticism towards EU regulations, particularly those aimed at standardizing and promoting competition within the market. They argue against specific regulations, such as the mandate for USB-C ports on electronic devices, positing that such rules stifle innovation and lock in potentially outdated technology. This viewpoint reflects a broader opposition to the EU’s regulatory approach, which they perceive as overly prescriptive and detrimental to technological advancement. Source “More on the EU’s Market Might”.

In discussions about specific companies, the individual shows a marked bias. They criticize the EU for allegedly favoring companies like Spotify, which is based in the EU, and accuse the EU of imposing unfair penalties on non-EU companies like Apple. This criticism often lacks acknowledgment of the broader context, such as the EU applying the same regulations to all companies operating within its market. The individual’s defense of Apple against EU regulations, coupled with their harsh stance on Spotify, highlights a selective scrutiny that favors US companies over EU counterparts. Sources: “More on the EU’s Market Might” and “The EU’s Share of Apple’s Global Revenue”.

[… The] behavior is suggestive of an underlying belief that their economic interests are threatened by EU regulations, leading to a protective stance over the current market dynamics that favor dominant US companies. Source: “More on the EU’s Market Might”.

Overall, the individual’s rhetoric aligns with someone who is resistant to change that threatens established advantages, displaying a protectionist attitude towards US market dominance and a dismissive stance towards regulatory efforts aimed at leveling the playing field.

This description of Gruber in the context of his comments on EU regulation—and regulation in general—is, in my opinion, accurate. I feel like that last paragraph is spot on.

⌞w⌝