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

Have the Tech Giants Grown Too Powerful?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 161 posts

Re: Have the Tech Giants Grown Too Powerful?

#151

Post by r00fus »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #119
Bartweiss wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still baffled by the focus on FANG as too powerful and inescapable, especially from generally left/liberal writers. They're not always friendly or easy to avoid, certainly, but they're far more escapable and far less legislatively malicious than Comcast, AT&T, and their ilk. Obviously lots of people are mad at those companies too, but it's frustrating to see "hit Google with antitrust suits!" getting high-profile…

Google and Facebook are allowed to maintain data about me and my life, sell that data to others, and I have no recourse. My broadband and mobile providers see a much slimmer cross section of my life, and are far less capable as data aggregation and warehousing systems comparatively speaking. Google and Facebook (and Amazon, to a lesser extent) are for-profit surveillance systems at their core. How could you not deman…

Why aren't you complaining about Equifax instead then? Now there's a company who absolutely deserves scorn.

Re: Have the Tech Giants Grown Too Powerful?

#152

Post by sangnoir »

tivert wrote: post #112
Bartweiss wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still baffled by the focus on FANG as too powerful and inescapable, especially from generally left/liberal writers. They're not always friendly or easy to avoid, certainly, but they're far more escapable and far less legislatively malicious than Comcast, AT&T, and their ilk. Obviously lots of people are mad at those companies too, but it's frustrating to see "hit Google with antitrust suits!" getting high-profile…

> I'm still baffled by the focus on FANG as too powerful and inescapable, especially from generally left/liberal writers. They're not always friendly or easy to avoid, certainly, but they're far more escapable and far less legislatively malicious than Comcast, AT&T, and their ilk. Facebook and Google have are far more powerful and inescapable for writers than for the general public, as those companies are the primary…

> Facebook and Google have are far more powerful and inescapable for writers than for the general public

This is insightful. Sometimes I forget that journalists occasionally have points-of-view that are not quite aligned with the public - I think they forget that too. I suspect that's also why middle-aged, balding men (frequently English professors) who are somehow irresistible to (much) younger women are over-represented in novels as heroes.

Re: Have the Tech Giants Grown Too Powerful?

#153

Post by jchonphoenix »

erlend_sh wrote: post #150
super-serial wrote: post #99

The ISPs and mobile carriers are too powerful. At least Google/Facebook have to innovate, or buy companies like Instagram or Whatsapp that innovate. ISPs get their billions in revenue from monopoly. All they have to do is buy off politicans and put people like Ajit Pai in power. Now that they've started to acquire tech companies like Yahoo, no one can stop them from giving preferential treatment to their content and…

ISPs are USA’s problem. FANG is a global problem.

If by global, you exclude China with 1/6 of the world population, then sure. While you're at it, you should exclude Japan, SE Asia, and Russia also.

Re: Have the Tech Giants Grown Too Powerful?

#154

Post by dang »

adventured wrote: post #87
lumberjack wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook and Google alone could effectively change "facts" to suit their political agendas. They alone could easily heavily influence the democratic process all over the world. That is far more dangerous than some guys with guns.

Far more dangerous than some guys with guns huh. You mean the hundred million people butchered in the 20th century by governments with guns is better than Google influencing a democratic process. Laughable. There are no public persons or entities that don't change facts to suit their political agendas. That's true at the partisan individual level, that's true at the politician level, that's true at the federal agency…

> the hundred million people butchered in the 20th century by governments with guns is better than

Would you please stop posting like this to HN? Ideological flamewar tropes are not welcome here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Have the Tech Giants Grown Too Powerful?

#155

Post by blub »

r00fus wrote: post #151
toomuchtodo wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google and Facebook are allowed to maintain data about me and my life, sell that data to others, and I have no recourse. My broadband and mobile providers see a much slimmer cross section of my life, and are far less capable as data aggregation and warehousing systems comparatively speaking. Google and Facebook (and Amazon, to a lesser extent) are for-profit surveillance systems at their core. How could you not deman…

Why aren't you complaining about Equifax instead then? Now there's a company who absolutely deserves scorn.

That's just a red herring you're dangling in front of our noses to distract us.

There's no law of the universe saying one has to address bad actors in a specific order or sequentially.

Furthermore, Equifax is a problem that the US needs to solve by themselves. Google & Facebook are a global problem.

Re: Have the Tech Giants Grown Too Powerful?

#156

Post by Bartweiss »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #119
Bartweiss wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still baffled by the focus on FANG as too powerful and inescapable, especially from generally left/liberal writers. They're not always friendly or easy to avoid, certainly, but they're far more escapable and far less legislatively malicious than Comcast, AT&T, and their ilk. Obviously lots of people are mad at those companies too, but it's frustrating to see "hit Google with antitrust suits!" getting high-profile…

Google and Facebook are allowed to maintain data about me and my life, sell that data to others, and I have no recourse. My broadband and mobile providers see a much slimmer cross section of my life, and are far less capable as data aggregation and warehousing systems comparatively speaking. Google and Facebook (and Amazon, to a lesser extent) are for-profit surveillance systems at their core. How could you not deman…

"are allowed to maintain data about me and my life, sell that data to others, and I have no recourse"

All of that applies unchanged to Verizon, Comcast, et al, even if they aren't currently doing so.

"My broadband and mobile providers see a much slimmer cross section of my life"

I'm not sure this is true in general? I agree that Google and Facebook have a fair bit of data about me. They have vastly more data about average users who use Facebook sign-in, don't block tracking, leave location services on, etc. But broadband and mobile providers see every site most users visit (even if your DNS isn't your ISP), along with metadata about those interactions. And mobile providers track location effectively non-stop, even if location services are off, plus extensive metadata on calls and texts.

And that's before we get into the monopoly issues; Verizon now owns the scraps of data-hog Yahoo so it's operating in both domains. I'm not sure why I would assume Oath is any less scary as an aggregator and warehouse than Google. (Less secure, undoubtedly, but that's not a mark in its favor. "Verizon sucks at technology" does not make me feel better.)

"How could you not demand oversight and regulation of such systems in a democracy?"

Again, my argument isn't "Facebook and Google are beyond reproach", it's "why are we more worried about FANG than their analogues who also have monopoly control over users and in-depth access to people's locations and call records?"

The other issue with regulation, of course, is that a key concern for all of these companies is that they hand data to the government, often without so much as a warrant. (And yet again, mobile providers are noticeably worse about this than any other player - except Yahoo, which is now tied to a mobile provider.) That doesn't make regulation a bad idea, but it certainly cripples my faith in it as a full solution.

Re: Have the Tech Giants Grown Too Powerful?

#157

Post by CM30 »

They certainly have from the perspective of a website creator or business owner. If you're running a business (or hell, any service in general), then you have to either play by Google and Facebook's rules or risk being rendered totally irrelevant and inaccessible to large portions of the population.

If your company's website is banned from Google, that can effectively be game over for the company, especially if you can't get reconsidered. Same if they move into your industry in many cases.

Re: Have the Tech Giants Grown Too Powerful?

#158

Post by dralley »

wilsonnb2 wrote: post #57
confounded wrote: post #9

Unless you work for one, or have founded a company purpose-built for acquisition, I don’t see how the answer can be ‘No’. For entrepreneurs, the monopolistic stranglehold these companies have, make them impossible to beat with a better product. The best possible outcome is acquisition. You may join, but never beat them. For Free Software hackers, the giants turning away from open standards, and towards DRM and abuse…

> For entrepreneurs, the monopolistic stranglehold these companies have, make them impossible to beat with a better product. The best possible outcome is acquisition. You may join, but never beat them. Isn't this exactly what everyone said about IBM until Microsoft came along, and then what everyone said about Microsoft until Google/Apple/Facebook/Amazon came along? Why is this time different?

Microsoft only stopped being a destructive force of nature after the Department of Justice gave them a kick to the face.

Re: Have the Tech Giants Grown Too Powerful?

#159

Post by OnlyRepliesToBS »

white-flame wrote: post #26

The "tech giants" are creating and controlling core forms of communication, both interpersonal and broadcast/public. That's too important and fundamental to the health of society to allow it to be arbitrarily engineered, filtered, and slanted for maximizing profit. If they were acting like common carriers, it would be a completely different issue. But they're not; they have business models that necessitate the manipu…

"We neeeeeeed them now!"

Fundamental? Bullshit.

Re: Have the Tech Giants Grown Too Powerful?

#160

Post by r00fus »

blub wrote: post #155
r00fus wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why aren't you complaining about Equifax instead then? Now there's a company who absolutely deserves scorn.

That's just a red herring you're dangling in front of our noses to distract us. There's no law of the universe saying one has to address bad actors in a specific order or sequentially. Furthermore, Equifax is a problem that the US needs to solve by themselves. Google & Facebook are a global problem.

Equifax (and Facebook) actually had an exfiltrated event. And they didn't get punished.

Don't lump Google in there.

Post reply on HN