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

FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 736 posts

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#551

Post by ehnto »

kyriee wrote: post #538
meekmind wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is. It's possible to have two completely valid, objective, and opposed positions in an argument where multiple different groups have a vested interest in one position being more popular than the other. Which one is propaganda? The one you disagree with? The one that doesn't fit with your preconceived notions? The one that doesn't fit with your personality profile? Both positions? Neither position? Do we just shut…

How about a simpler principle: harm reduction. Letting people be mislead about vaccines harms people, letting people get brainwashed into mistrusting the legitimacy of their institutions harms people, letting people use their platform to incite genocide harms people. They actually have metric to measure those things, it’s just that they prefer to dial down the heat, not kill it. It’s just too good for engagement. Don…

> They actually have metric to measure those things, it’s just that they prefer to dial down the heat, not kill it. It’s just too good for engagement.

To be fair they are clearly fighting a delicate balance of censorship and community moderation. It's different from say a forum of yesteryear, because a forum can have a clear set of community values that should work for everyone.

Facebook and all social media is a single platform for many communities, and so given the new role of moderator they are in the impossible position of making a set of community values that apply to all communities.

I think the reason a lot of material isn't outright banned where you or I would see obvious misinformation or hate is because of this.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#553

Post by zelly »

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…

the social graph isn't all that valuable to outsiders. anyone determined enough can scrape it without permission anyway. no one else can do much with it except maybe intelligence agencies which were already voluntarily given root access a long time ago.

the main economic value of it is to serve ads on Facebook dot com. that's it. that's how they make 100% of their earnings.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#554

Post by systemvoltage »

justapassenger wrote: post #542
systemvoltage wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is the problem. Operating at a loss while wiping out players without deep pockets to run at a loss. This should be illegal. Amazon and Uber have wiped out small players.

That would make all new business illegal, as you operate at a loss for multiple years.

At some point it needs to be illegal. When a large company of 30000 employees starts wiping out entire industries with cash buffers, you can see why this is just wrong and monopolistic/oligopolistic behavior.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#555

Post by JMTQp8lwXL »

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…

Separating companies, while certainly a more blunt instrument, is far more broadly applicable when it comes to anti-trust enforcement than it is to come up with a specific policy proposal on a per-company basis. The latter would require an act of Congress each time a company went too far, and Congress moves too slowly, is too divided, and doesn't have the bandwidth to individually address every anti-trust situation with a new law.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#556

Post by zelly »

ashtonkem wrote: post #548
crazygringo wrote: post #199

Honestly, while I have my doubts about this succeeding, it nevertheless feels like the big tech suit most likely to succeed. Amazon promoting its own brands isn't much different from a supermarket offering its own brand items. Apple isn't a monopoly in phones because of Android. And Google's search is so inherently tied to selling ads as a business model that separating them is a difficult argument -- plus search com…

I think another ripe target would be separating Google from content hosting, especially YouTube.

no one else can afford to host that much useless content except maybe the US government. the alternative would be that YT dies and nothing replaces it. sometimes there is no alternative to centralization.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#557

Post by zelly »

TylerE wrote: post #177
CobrastanJorji wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been giving the wrong answer to "Should I buy Bitcoin" since 2011 or so. I was bearish on Amazon when its stock was at 60 because its P/E ratio was ridiculous. I've learned to just be comfortable with the fact that I'm wrong a lot.

You're not necessarily wrong. It's a long held truism that the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

that's just delusion and cope. if the price keeps going up for years, then no matter what you think you're wrong. the market isn't being irrational, you are.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#558

Post by zelly »

TylerE wrote: post #298
chillacy wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either one is right or the market is irrational? Seems like by that logic one can never really be proven wrong.

You can be right, the market can be wrong, and then the market can crash before you can exit the position. Imagine, for instance, trying to get actual USD (NOT USDT!) for BTC when that fever dream ends.

there is no end. crypto will continue to swallow up all the world's capital and you'll be furious at how many leading zeros there are in your BTC-priced paycheck.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#559

Post by slim »

saddlerustle wrote: post #222
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…

There's no way to provide access to the social graph in a privacy preserving way. It's not okay to allow a third party to access the data your friends have shared with you without your friends consenting. Unencumbered API access to the social graph is exactly what led to the Cambridge Analytica scandal, and promising to restrict API access was part of Facebook's settlement with the FTC.

wow, that's the "non proliferation" argument. it's the first time I see it applied since the cold war. I guess I should have expected it. it's the nuclear warhead equivalent argument when you're justifying a monoply
Post reply on HN