Tim Berners-Lee says tech giants may have to be split up • Hacker News Board

Re: Tim Berners-Lee says tech giants may have to be split up

#211

Post by TimJYoung » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 4:59 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #164

TimJYoung wrote: post #160

I think the solution may lie with changes to, or removal of, Section 230 of the CDA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communicati... I suspect that forcing those that host 3rd party content/discussion to actually moderate and control the discussion will keep the size of such online communities smaller, which is good. Or, they will simply need increase revenue so that they can properly moderate them. E…

> I think the solution may lie with changes to, or removal of, Section 230 of the CDA [...] > I suspect that forcing those that host 3rd party content/discussion to actually moderate and control the discussion [...] CDA Section 230 was largely adopted to encourage active moderation, since without it active moderation made a host a “publisher” rather than a mere “distributor”, which triggers strict liability for a num…

Yes, but is it being used that way ? Everything that I've seen has indicated that service providers use this law to play it both ways: they actively control what users see through algorithms, but then claim that they are (largely) not responsible for the moderation of questionable content. IOW, they are not just a passive distribution point for information, and, in many cases, actively control the flow of information. Doesn't that intrinsically make them a publisher ?

Re: Tim Berners-Lee says tech giants may have to be split up

#212

Post by dcow » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 4:59 PM UTC

pnloyd wrote: post #120

foolfoolz wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or just stop using twitter?

I've used this strategy consistently for things I don't like, works great! Don't understand why more people don't consider it.

I know, right? The only time I encounter Twitter is when others link me to it. I’m okay with that and sometimes I share forward, but I’m not fed a daily stream of tweets. I left google services a few months ago. It was a long weekend of work, but I’m happier than I was before with otherwise no noticeable impact (except the emails that write themselves for you in gmail). I exported all my data from Facebook around the same time but I’m still mulling over how to resolve deleting 10 years of my digital life against my core principle that things I’ve said and done should not be allowed to disappear even if my 30 years future self would look back in disgust.

Re: Tim Berners-Lee says tech giants may have to be split up

#213

Post by sidr » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 5:01 PM UTC

hannasanarion wrote: post #175

CalRobert wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"like how the hell do you make money " Well, you could charge for it. But of course you wouldn't be able to compete with free - you'd have to have competitors who needed to charge too. They do exist but are pretty niche. The WELL comes to mind. www.well.com If it's any help I applaud every newspaper that puts up a paywall, and more are doing it. It only came about when the industry was (is) about to be completely wip…

>Well, you could charge for it. But of course you wouldn't be able to compete with free - you'd have to have competitors who needed to charge too. Are you sure about that? Twitter's annual revenue is 2.4 billion dollars, and they have 300 million users. $0.55/month per user is all it would take to match their current revenue. Sure, when a service is getting up off the ground, you can't beat free, but for one that's e…

> A $1 premium ad-free option with 50% adoption would increase twitter's revenue and remove the perverse incentives.

It would. A $1 ad-free option would see nowhere close to 50% adoption though.

Re: Tim Berners-Lee says tech giants may have to be split up

#214

Post by gist » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 5:02 PM UTC

SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #141

gist wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually have a big issue when the news runs stories like this to begin with. They would do the same btw if Woz said it or any other well known person. Sure the fact they can tag on 'father of the web' gives a strong pull but that is part of the problem. His thoughts on this aren't any more important than thousands of others that nobody has ever heard of. This is a total 'news as entertainment' story. And this has…

I agree that his opinion should have no bearing on the way that the modern WWW is run - but considering he invented the platform I think his opinion is interesting and well worth hearing when it didn't turn out the way he originally envisaged.

> I think his opinion is interesting

Hence 'entertainment', right?

> when it didn't turn out the way he originally envisaged

Sure but who cares if that is the case? And he didn't imagine and invent the modern web nor did he even popularize it or put much effort into making it what is is today.

By his statements I take it that he is jealous that he feels that he has not played a bigger role in what happened after his 'invention' (which was based on a great deal of work prior to his involvement). Many of us used the arpanet in the 70's not to mention the US Government's involvement. Honestly (and nobody will agree I am sure) if there was no conflict with Russia the Internet would not exist (most likely).

And I am not seeing what he had a vision for any more than solving some simple issue he saw which was:

> Instead, it was hard work, the experience of working in computer science and an attempt to overcome the frustrations of trying to share information with colleagues and students

That is not the web today or even close to it and for that matter it wasn't the web even in 2000 or 1998.

Re: Tim Berners-Lee says tech giants may have to be split up

#215

Post by choko » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 5:02 PM UTC

Mononokay wrote: post #177

choko wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Social media isn't faster or more efficient than email though. In fact it might be slower due to the amount of clutter and ads encountered when using facebook. The comparison between phones and post doesn't really hold up.

> Social media isn't faster or more efficient than email though. What reality are you living in that Twitter is slower than email?

Same one as you. I can email my entire family just as easily as I could tweet them and with fewer restrictions.

Since you have directed this in an uncivil course: In what reality do you live where "email is to twitter as postal mail is to telephone" is a true statement?

Re: Tim Berners-Lee says tech giants may have to be split up

#216

Post by gambler » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 5:04 PM UTC

bepotts wrote: post #58

gambler wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You don’t need Facebook or Instagram or Twitter or any of that other crap. You didn't need Microsoft products in the 90s. Except you did if you wanted to do serious work. That's why they were targeted by antitrust regulation. Exactly the same situation here, except Facebook and co have much more control over their product and can directly influence public opinion, not just software.

This is a dumb comparison and too many people make this argument. You couldn't use any technology without paying the Microsoft tax. There were no smartphones, no internet-of-things, and the internet was just getting started. Everything you did had to be done on the desktop. That is no longer the case. You don't want to use Google? Type in www.bing.com. You don't want to use Facebook? Use Twitter, WhatsApp, Snapchat,…

>You couldn't use any technology without paying the Microsoft tax.

You could use Mac or Linux. Except you wouldn't be able to interoperate with everyone else. This is precisely the situation with Facebook/Twitter.

>You don't want to use Google? Type in www.bing.com.

Their monopoly isn't on the user side, but on the provider side. If you want your web content to be discoverable, you have to play by Google's rules. If they announce that all websites have to add dancing elephants to their pages to be discoverable, most of the web will soon have dancing elephants. This kind of power can easily be used to discourage competition by creating high barrier of entry for indexing.

Re: Tim Berners-Lee says tech giants may have to be split up

#217

Post by eiaoa » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 5:04 PM UTC

cambaceres wrote: post #133

maxxxxx wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we generally should discourage growth of any company beyond a certain size. I don't see any societal value in these large companies but a lot of disadvantages.

Big companies add huge value to all our wellbeing. 1000 companies with a revenue of ten million dollars can afford to spend little to nothing on research, while one company with a revenue of ten billion dollars can spend a lot. How many startups comes up with new medicines, for example? Furthermore, you are implying that all that people do has to be done with the societal value in mind. What about the value for indiv…

> Big companies add huge value to all our wellbeing. 1000 companies with a revenue of ten million dollars can afford to spend little to nothing on research, while one company with a revenue of ten billion dollars can spend a lot.

There's a lot of space between companies with 10 million dollars in revenue and ones with 10-100 billion where lots of R&D can happen.

Smaller companies can be very good at new product development, and are probably better at supporting those products once they catch on and become established. The really far-out R&D is probably better handled by university research labs than by big-company monopolies and semi-monopolies, which then will spin off small product development companies.

> How many startups comes up with new medicines, for example?

Seems like quite a lot, actually:

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20180509/BLOGS11/180...

http://fortune.com/2016/05/13/big-pharma-biotech-startups/:

> A crucial part of the allure: Pint-size ventures are driving pharma innovation. The majority of drugs approved in recent years originated at smaller outfits—64% of them last year, according to HBM Partners, a health care investing firm.

Re: Tim Berners-Lee says tech giants may have to be split up

#218

Post by greymeister » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 5:05 PM UTC

nine_k wrote: post #203

Sileni wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the comment you're replying to is trying to strengthen that ability. Now you don't have to convince some critical mass of your friends to switch over; you just switch over to the new platform, which everyone is connected to via some open source API/protocol, or the company running the data service is not running a front end to present the data. You continue to get the data from your friends and family while u…

My point is exactly not having to impose regulation. The power to move away is already in the people's hands. You can do it at any moment, without a governmental mandate. The point is to use this power. But first people have to recognize their power, and learn to use it a bit.

Thanks for posting this. It's all too often people (like in this article) want to lean on bureaucracy and legislation to fix their problems as opposed to actually doing something about it. Not using Twitter and Facebook has a positive step for my sanity, much like not watching 24 hour cable news was another positive step. I don't need the government to break up CNN or News Corp to solve that problem.

Re: Tim Berners-Lee says tech giants may have to be split up

#219

Post by eseehausen » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 5:06 PM UTC

cambaceres wrote: post #180

maxxxxx wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I said "companies of a certain size". Don't make this into a socialism vs capitalism issue. Yes, companies benefit society. But I believe trillion dollar companies are a negative for society. They get way too powerful.

Only if they use their power to more bad things than good things.

Same with governments and the attempts at state capitalism you're referring to. Everything always is good unless it's bad, the question is how easily can it be constrained when it goes bad (and monitored for the signs of it going bad).

Re: Tim Berners-Lee says tech giants may have to be split up

#220

Post by dcow » Thu, Nov 01, 2018, 5:07 PM UTC

rusk wrote: post #145

stupidbird wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

at a certain rate of adoption doesn't that kind of become like "stop using email"

Nobody uses email any more ... I mean they use it but it's not a high-engagement medium. I'd guess nearly 90% of emails never get read.

GP: I’m convinced this is how people with poor email management skills feel. It’s how I felt until I stepped up my filter, unsubscribe, and delete game and really developed a strategy for managing my inbox. It’s not heavyweight but the goal is to reduce your inbox to a task/todo list of sorts—only the things you need to worry about. Might be a direct inquiry or a notification about an upcoming sale, etc. Eventually you get to a point where you realize that _everything_ uses email. The internet _is_ email. It’s just really easy to end up being bombarded by so much of it that it feels useless.