Live data from Hacker News

Trust-Busting as the Unsexy Answer to Google and Facebook

lareviewofbooks.org

141–150 of 184 posts

Re: Trust-Busting as the Unsexy Answer to Google and Facebook

#141
post #104

Lot of people talking about third-party application development in this thread. It's also worth considering the opposite side of that, data portability. GDPR already requires companies allow users to easily export all their data [1], and if the US did the same it could really help mitigate the network effect social media companies use to hold onto their dominance (i.e. Facebook's properties) [1] https://gdpr-info.eu/…

Competitors to Facebook really need to be aware of the power of this law. In particular, it says:

"The data subject shall have the right to ... transmit those data to another controller without hindrance from the controller to which the personal data have been provided, where ... the processing is carried out by automated means... [, and] shall have the right to have the personal data transmitted directly from one controller to another, where technically feasible."

If the data transfer is automated and direct, then a Facebook user should be able to request that their posts on Facebook be continually synched over to their Mastodon account (for example).

As Facebook is already a member of the Data Transfer Project [1], it would look very bad for them if they only allowed data to be automatically synched one way, especially if most Fediverse implementations supported two way synch.

Of course, once your data is fully synched, you'd never need to actually browse Facebook itself again, and your friends on both Facebook and Mastodon would be able to read your Mastodon posts. (I suppose Facebook would similarly cite "data protection reasons" for why they can't synch your friend's Facebook posts out to you on another site, though).

Anyway, I'm sure an EU anti-trust investigator would enjoy the opportunity to examine claims against a big US social media company like Facebook, especially if it were a small EU social media provider bringing the complaint.

[1] https://datatransferproject.dev/

Re: Trust-Busting as the Unsexy Answer to Google and Facebook

#142
post #125
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if it were legal (which it should be IMO), I can't see anything other than a cat and mouse game happening where the primaries change their authentication patterns on a daily, hourly or minute to minute basis. Consider all the things that facebook does to mess with scrapers right now - every single letter in a div, multiples that are hidden, etc. Its a complete mess. "Forced open APIs" is an interesting idea in t…

> every single letter in a div That's... I... Well. :0

How dare they. They should put every letter in a instead, since letters should be inline. Heathens.

Re: Trust-Busting as the Unsexy Answer to Google and Facebook

#143
post #4

As talked about in this article, I think the main catalyst to increased anti-trust scrunity will be a mind shift away from the "consumer welfare" view of anti-trust. For the most part, big tech companies provide amazing service. I can't think of another industry that has a product as good as the tech companies of today have. Yes there may be some fakes on Amazon, and DDG in some use cases may be better than Google, b…

> I can't think of another industry that has a product as good as the tech companies of today have. The first step towards saner attitude towards tech is stopping with this glorification of tech. With the exception of Google or say wikipedia, who have made knowledge accessible in unprecedented manner, modern technology companies (the name is imprecise, because it is really just digital technology) have not as much im…

> The first step towards saner attitude towards tech is stopping with this glorification of tech.

I'm all for it. But how can we achieve this? I think the main problem here is the mysticism over tech. There are probably two major fronts: complexity and secrecy. We should bring them down. How can we do it? Well, for one thing, we can demand more openness and thorough understanding of everyday tech we use, while educating the public that these things will bite us eventually. I don't know how we can achieve this at a legislative level, but the law is mere reflection of our attitude toward things. First we have to say that these things (both over complexity and secrecy) are not cool because they hinder reasoning. It's an idea that I think worth spreading.

Re: Trust-Busting as the Unsexy Answer to Google and Facebook

#145
So, Google and Facebook suck up lots of personal information and some people don't like that. Splitting them apart wouldn't change their business models.

Arbitrary destruction of their business doesn't do anything to protect consumer privacy.

There's also nothing anti-competitive about either business. Using a different website is as simple as typing a URL into your web browser.

Re: Trust-Busting as the Unsexy Answer to Google and Facebook

#146
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is a product, not a monopoly.

I said "monopoly rent." It's a term with a specific definition that you would do well to understand.

Monopoly rent implies (near) monopolies, which Facebook is not.

What's more, this is a conversation around individual users. Facebook's economic rent is paid by their customers, which are advertisers and not the subject of this conversation.

Re: Trust-Busting as the Unsexy Answer to Google and Facebook

#147
post #125
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if it were legal (which it should be IMO), I can't see anything other than a cat and mouse game happening where the primaries change their authentication patterns on a daily, hourly or minute to minute basis. Consider all the things that facebook does to mess with scrapers right now - every single letter in a div, multiples that are hidden, etc. Its a complete mess. "Forced open APIs" is an interesting idea in t…

> every single letter in a div That's... I... Well. :0

Do they really do this? I would totally believe it but I don't see it...

Re: Trust-Busting as the Unsexy Answer to Google and Facebook

#148

As a self-defined libertarian, I think one of the most critical functions a government is responsible for is anti-trust and Monopoly busting. This is one of the critical issues of our time, but is only a symptom of the corruption of Congress, which is a deep topic in it's own right. Free markets are like any hierarchy, and if theres no regulation mechanism the powerful will dominate the less powerful. I think history…

There's absolutely nothing stopping competition. Switching from Facebook or Google to a competing service is as simple as typing a URL into the web browser. They maintain their business position by providing an excellent product, not by preventing other people from creating competing products.

Re: Trust-Busting as the Unsexy Answer to Google and Facebook

#150

At the heart of the article, the assertion that the power of these corporations is threatening our government implies that this is a problem -- which in turn implies that government is somehow superior to corporations. Why is this necessarily true?

It doesn't have to imply that government is outright superior to corporations. It would be sufficient to imply that neither should have overwhelming power over the other.
Post reply on HN