Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 228 posts

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#101

Post by supplied_demand »

JSONwebtoken wrote: post #94
christmasity wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Right wing propaganda is so strong and coordinated these days that they can develop a new goal and drive a single message repeatedly across multiple platforms for months or years. If that is the case, why is it that we see mostly left wing propaganda on social media and most news sites?

What's the right-wing counterpart to Shareblue? I have never seen something equivalent to the effectiveness of modern "grassroots" messaging campaigns sponsored by certain democratic chessmasters. The fact that full-time protester is now a decently paid and socially acceptable job is incredible.

In Illinois, we have the Illinois Policy Institute, IPI, which is a "think-tank" by definition. In reality, it is a modern grassroots messaging campaign sponsored by Republican chessmasters. IPI, and it's sister organization Illinois News Network, is more local than Shareblue, but still very comparable.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#102

Post by khawkins »

stale2002 wrote: post #37
humanrebar wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The question is have we reached a point where technology and globalization provide such enormous returns to the economies of scale that we can't go back or is all this corporate concentration just due to a lack of government enforcement? At some point, America decided that only horizontal monopolies counted, not vertical ones. Many of our concerns about antitrust would be assuaged if regulators started keeping sepa…

Well so, thats because the concept of a vertical "monopoly" makes no sense. A monopoly means that you are the one major player in a certain market. It is in the word. It is definitely possible that a company could have excess market power in a certain SEGMENT of their vertically integrated market, but that is still a horizontal monopoly. Vertical integration isn't a threat to anybody as long as every segment of the m…

It's even worse than a monopoly, it's the elimination of a market. When you perform a vertical merger you no longer have to negotiate with people at that level of the market. The acquired business now only has to respond to the demands of the parent company and it is only through those demands that market forces act on the child business.

Furthermore, since the parent company has removed its demand from the market, there is less money moving around. The less competitive businesses who contributed to the market forces keeping prices low end up folding or being vertically integrated into competitors. The market dies and the oligarchy strengthens immensely. Especially so because now startup competitors must have all segments of the market in order to compete.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#103

Post by dustingetz »

folksinger wrote: post #64
dustingetz wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Network effects are inherent to networks; you can't regulate away the very thing that makes them valuable to people (well, i dont see how at least)

We make natural monopolies into public institutions. Roads, sidewalks, parks, copyright registrars, postal services, land surveyors, courts, law enforcement, etc, etc. And then we take an active role in their management. Notice the difference between the physical activity of helping to maintain these institutions and the physical activity of sitting at your keyboard and typing into an HTML form and hitting the submit…

Sure you can "nationalize" facebook or the world wide web (by like the UN or something?? these are international Earth-scale entities)

But there are a lot of tradeoffs there too and some really chilling consequences.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#104

Post by fabianhjr »

dustingetz wrote: post #53
frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #4

The solution really is a revitalization of antitrust policy. The reason markets work is because participants in them are bound to a 'race to the bottom' with many other participants doing the same thing. When companies aren't forced to race to the bottom against each other, the conditions of authoritarianism rise. Authoritarian structures don't have to necessarily come from government - monopolies, oligopolies and im…

Network effects are inherent to networks; you can't regulate away the very thing that makes them valuable to people (well, i dont see how at least)

Network effects can occur in federated networks as long as different platforms cooperate and communicate.

Currently, the Fediverse[1] exists through multiple free software platforms and online communities. (Like Mastodon[2])

This can and should expand to include Twitter/FB/others but that would go against their mantra of owning the platform to ensure maximum profits/rent-seeking and power over information. (Platform Capitalism[3])

[1]: https://medium.com/we-distribute/a-quick-guide-to-the-free-n...

[2]: https://joinmastodon.org/

[3]: https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Platform+Capitalism-p-9781509504...

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#105

Post by asdffdsa321 »

jacksmith21006 wrote: post #48
colordrops wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both right and left wing propaganda is strong and coordinated these days. I can't say anything that doesn't toe the line with either side and not have them look at me like I'm an asshole. I've been called both a socialist welfare state supporter and a reactionary corporate feudalist. Which is it folks. The division is worse than it ever was in my lifetime.

Only seen the right wing go after Google. Not sure I really even know what is left wing? What would you consider left wing?

Here's a litmus test, how do you gauge your reactions to these statements:

African-Americans, in this time and place (America in this decade), commit more crime when compared to Europeans and Asians as a percentage breakdown by race.

Women and minorities have plenty of public resources (facilities, social programs, and information) to succeed academically and enter white collar professions.

Income taxes, which are currently near or above 50% at the higher/highest brackets is plenty and whose rates do not need to be raised. Governments need to cut or curb spending instead of raising the income tax higher.

Stand your ground law is needed to protect a citizen's civil rights and the political arguments made in the wake of Travon Martin's death have been insufficient in changing that status.

These are what I consider to be right wing statements or facts that conservatives don't ignore/insulate themselves from. This is all relative to American politics - in Europe the political climate is much different. Hacker news, from what I've seen, seems to be very left-wing. Also, left wing tends to be cruelly and irrationally/coldly dismissive/patronizing towards rural Christian conservatives - which is more than disturbing to me, but some of the arguments made from them (in my opinion) are not wholly incorrect. I have arguments/beliefs in both sides, but find that most media besides Fox push progressive agendas (i.e. even the 'impartial' reports will use rhetoric and facts which fit in well with progressive agendas).

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#106

Post by stale2002 »

khawkins wrote: post #102
stale2002 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well so, thats because the concept of a vertical "monopoly" makes no sense. A monopoly means that you are the one major player in a certain market. It is in the word. It is definitely possible that a company could have excess market power in a certain SEGMENT of their vertically integrated market, but that is still a horizontal monopoly. Vertical integration isn't a threat to anybody as long as every segment of the m…

It's even worse than a monopoly, it's the elimination of a market. When you perform a vertical merger you no longer have to negotiate with people at that level of the market. The acquired business now only has to respond to the demands of the parent company and it is only through those demands that market forces act on the child business. Furthermore, since the parent company has removed its demand from the market, t…

I mean, your argument is effectively that vertically integrated companies are so efficient, and lower costs so much, that they force competitors out of business.

If I was a lawyer, fighting FOR the company, I would literally use your exact same argument as for why vertical integration is a good thing.

Reducing costs, and making the market more efficient is a good thing, not a bad thing. Reducing prices is good, not bad.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#107

Post by narrator »

kombucha2 wrote: post #68
narrator wrote: post #8

Which makes me ask the question: do you, gentle Hacker News reader, really want diversity of opinion and why? Do you have unpopular opinions and if so, would you get fired or ostracized for sharing them? Are you practicing crimethink? After all, the only people actually working on alternatives to Google and Facebook are the alt-right who have been de-platformed. Gab.ai is so de-platformed that google doesn't even let…

GAB.ai is sooo lame.

Considering that it was done on a shoestring budget, it isn't that bad.

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#108

Post by jeady »

elefanten wrote: post #66
hi-im-mi-ih wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide an example of WSJ defending duopolies, or this sort of thing?

They're pretty warm overall to the telecom industry and tend to side with Ajit Pai.

And in fact they cited Pai in the article to support their position..

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#109

Post by AnimalMuppet »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #90
narrator wrote: post #8

Which makes me ask the question: do you, gentle Hacker News reader, really want diversity of opinion and why? Do you have unpopular opinions and if so, would you get fired or ostracized for sharing them? Are you practicing crimethink? After all, the only people actually working on alternatives to Google and Facebook are the alt-right who have been de-platformed. Gab.ai is so de-platformed that google doesn't even let…

> Are you practicing crimethink? -A few hundred years ago, being an atheist was "crimethink", as was religious tolerance towards Jews, Muslims, and so forth. -A few hundred years ago, questioning the divine right of kings to rule was "crimethink". -In the early 1600s, Galileo stood trial and was condemned for the "crimethink" of saying the Earth moved around the Sun, in contradiction to the teachings of the Church. -…

"The only ideas I'm afraid of letting people say are the ones that I think may be true and that I don't like." - Sam Altman

Re: The Google-Facebook Duopoly Threatens Diversity of Thought

#110

Post by oculusthrift »

imhelpingu wrote: post #27
guelo wrote: post #17

Right wing propaganda is so strong and coordinated these days that they can develop a new goal and drive a single message repeatedly across multiple platforms for months or years. This attack on Google is a new right wing message developed this year but they just keep hammering at it across all their channels tailoring their argument to the different audiences and continuously building mind share and momentum.

"Letting a giant monopoly control the internet might be a bad idea." Right wing propaganda.

hm they’re fine if that monopoly is verizon
Post reply on HN