FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization • Hacker News Board

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#201

Post by mfer » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 9:09 PM UTC

theanarcrist wrote: post #171

ghufran_syed wrote: post #155

I feel like instead of pushing for the companies to separate, congress should pass laws mandating [adversarial interoperability]( https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interopera... ). Then the data (including the social graph) really would belong to the users, and facebook would have to compete with multiple other “social network clients” that would rapidly emerge. Facebook would lose some monopoly profi…

I agree and find the attempt at a breakup a bit frustrating. This is an action that could have profoundly disruptive effect and it's not really clear what the positives or negatives would be. For instance, FB has invested massively in trust and safety people operations and AI. What happens to that investment when IG is spun off? Laying out laws and regulations so the market works as intended (no doubt with adjustment…

> This is an action that could have profoundly disruptive effect

If FB is doing anti-competitive things than disruption is needed. It's not meant to be comfortable.

Companies are really good at learning the playing field and then gaming it for their benefits. Tweaks to laws are often easy to work around. Disruption that stops an illegal monopoly is going to be uncomfortable. Especially at first.

But, it opens the door for the future in ways that aren't options today.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#202

Post by nerfhammer » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 9:11 PM UTC

archeantus wrote: post #50

So if the acquisition of IG and Whats App were wrong, why did they get regulatory approval at the time?

IG was tiny at the time, not the behemoth it is today. They hadn't even released on Android yet.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#203

Post by mrlala » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 9:11 PM UTC

bilal4hmed wrote: post #178

mrlala wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WhatsApp is basically the norm outside of the US from what I can tell? So yeah, there's really no "competition". Either you have whatsapp or you don't talk to people. And it's highly used for cross-business communication in Europe, I can tell you that.

It seems its no competition because people like it not because there are no other options, because there are plenty

But my point is "it's the norm".

Either you use WhatsApp or you don't talk to people.

And I'm not saying this is a bad thing, really.. I think "monopolies" have their place in standardizing things that we do and it makes it convenient.

(Side note: if fucking Apple would open up iMessage on android/windows they would OWN the chat market in a matter of minutes in the US)

But there does get to a point where you cannot say "people use it because they like it". Most people use it solely because everyone else uses it.

Just like Facebook. There is no "alternative" for real-life profile social media. If you want to use that type of social media, Facebook is the only thing whether you like it or not.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#204

Post by mrits » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 9:11 PM UTC

sigmar wrote: post #191

mrkramer wrote: post #101

This doesn't make sense who authorized Instagram and Whatsapp acquisitions at the first place? FTC [1] It isn't Zuck's fault nobody else is as competitive as Facebook is.... I look at you MySpace and Twitter. [1] https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2012/08/ftc-c... "The Federal Trade Commission has closed its nonpublic investigation of Facebook's proposed acquisition of Instagram, Inc., without taking any…

For perspective, the acquisition was before IG had ads and before Facebook was publicly traded. How was the FTC supposed to magically see the future anti-competitive actions (like blocking vine)?

That same perspective shows that the industry has evolved since then. If FTC can't be held accountable for not predicting the future neither can Facebook. Of course, I don't believe this at all since anyone in the industry knew exactly why Facebook would buy Instagram, especially the FTC.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#205

Post by WhompingWindows » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 9:12 PM UTC

theanarcrist wrote: post #171

ghufran_syed wrote: post #155

I feel like instead of pushing for the companies to separate, congress should pass laws mandating [adversarial interoperability]( https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interopera... ). Then the data (including the social graph) really would belong to the users, and facebook would have to compete with multiple other “social network clients” that would rapidly emerge. Facebook would lose some monopoly profi…

I agree and find the attempt at a breakup a bit frustrating. This is an action that could have profoundly disruptive effect and it's not really clear what the positives or negatives would be. For instance, FB has invested massively in trust and safety people operations and AI. What happens to that investment when IG is spun off? Laying out laws and regulations so the market works as intended (no doubt with adjustment…

Your answer sidesteps regulatory capture. These big companies wield massive power in Washington, don't you think any regulation and law that's actually passed will benefit them and prevent competition?

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#206

Post by butler14 » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 9:12 PM UTC

I'm all for this but... Google, anyone?

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#207

Post by tobyhede » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 9:13 PM UTC

In all of these threads on Apple, Google, Facebook and friends, its fascinating that the overall tone and position of technologists has changed over time from radical cyberpunk freedom to "monopolies aren't that bad really".

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#208

Post by KaiserPro » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 9:13 PM UTC

djrogers wrote: post #112

justapassenger wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know it's a pipe dream, but an independent Oculus would make me so happy While that would cool for short-term, independent Oculus can stagnate. VR still needs many more billions to be truly usable, and I don't think independent company will be able to fund it.

> independent Oculus can stagnate My experience has been that technology is far more likely to stagnate at BigCo than SmallCo - especially if SmallCo's only source of revenue is said technology.

FB are pouring billions into oculus. They intend to operate it at a loss for a good 5 more years.

Only when AR is a thing will they stat to push for profitability.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#209

Post by maxerickson » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 9:13 PM UTC

theanarcrist wrote: post #171

ghufran_syed wrote: post #155

I feel like instead of pushing for the companies to separate, congress should pass laws mandating [adversarial interoperability]( https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interopera... ). Then the data (including the social graph) really would belong to the users, and facebook would have to compete with multiple other “social network clients” that would rapidly emerge. Facebook would lose some monopoly profi…

I agree and find the attempt at a breakup a bit frustrating. This is an action that could have profoundly disruptive effect and it's not really clear what the positives or negatives would be. For instance, FB has invested massively in trust and safety people operations and AI. What happens to that investment when IG is spun off? Laying out laws and regulations so the market works as intended (no doubt with adjustment…

In some sense this lawsuit is saying that the regulatory approvals of the Instagram and Whatsapp acquisitions were errors.

How is the market going to fix that?

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#210

Post by arxpoetica » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 9:14 PM UTC

Barrin92 wrote: post #164

thebigman433 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think down the line that would be true, but Facebook's willingness to burn literal billions of dollars at this point is basically the only thing carrying VR. Id love to see it split off in the future though.

I'm not sure big money is what is needed to create a flourishing VR sector. The appeal of VR has always been creating virtual experiences that are different and unique. honestly I think it makes much more sense for that scene to be decentralised and independent. Kind of like Minecraft came about, I have trouble imagining it as some sort big money project. I don't think the issue with VR at this point is so much techn…

Agree. VR is not more than a novelty and gaming tool yet. Gaming is a huge potential, but I think the real use cases haven't been proven out yet.

I'm still a believer, but I suspect there are other non-VR technologies that either need to catch up or just figure out how to dovetail for VR to be anything other than a novelty.