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

Why Did Congress Just Vote to Break Up Big Tech?

mattstoller.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 108 posts

Re: Why Did Congress Just Vote to Break Up Big Tech?

#11

Post by rpmisms »

ignoramous wrote: post #6

> The ACCESS Act mandates that big tech firms have to make their systems open to competitors and business rivals, in the same way that AT&T customers can talk to T-Mobile customers, or users of different email systems can communicate with one another. Okay, this is plausible, but it can turn into all kinds of mess as federated systems aren't simpler to design, build, or operate. For example, how would Signal inter-co…

> For example, how would Signal inter-communicate with e2ee intact with say, Facebook Messenger?

I think a judge is going to have to do a lot of homework on this law to come up with a realistic interpretation.

Re: Why Did Congress Just Vote to Break Up Big Tech?

#12

Post by stephc_int13 »

This is clearly needed, even if late, considering that antitrust laws are not a new thing.

There is hope, we tend to forget after only a few generations, but if politicians are moving now this is because the collective opinions about big tech progressively shifted during the last decade.

I might be naïve, but I think that HN played a role.

And of course this is not over yet.

Re: Why Did Congress Just Vote to Break Up Big Tech?

#13

Post by veerabadhra »

bigcorp-slave wrote: post #10

[flagged]

The anti trust break up of AT&T led to disruptive innovation, like mass produced cell phones. I personally can't wait for the AI revolution that will occur when Google is broken up. The Big Tech incumbents need to die out, because innovation stagnates in these monopolies.

Re: Why Did Congress Just Vote to Break Up Big Tech?

#14

Post by ehnto »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #9
ignoramous wrote: post #6

> The ACCESS Act mandates that big tech firms have to make their systems open to competitors and business rivals, in the same way that AT&T customers can talk to T-Mobile customers, or users of different email systems can communicate with one another. Okay, this is plausible, but it can turn into all kinds of mess as federated systems aren't simpler to design, build, or operate. For example, how would Signal inter-co…

> Either the incumbents remain entrenched because of the loopholes, or they would no longer wield undue advantage, leaving some breathing room for upstarts. Unsure if this is good or bad for software engineers. There are always unintended consequences, but it seems like it would be good in that if there are more upstarts there should also be more jobs for software engineers. The pay may (probably) won't be like what…

Not everyone would want to work at a FAANG company either. I have quietly hoped for a redistribution of software resources for a while, it's not a practically thought out hope. I just feel like the worlds software talent could do better work in more interesting and varied fields.

I also think it would lead to more innovation. How many engineers aren't working on their own ideas because the insane salaries at big tech would be stupid to give up? I don't blame someone on 200-500k a year for just sitting tight and soaking up the dollars. 500k a year is as much or more than a successful small business owner, and you don't have to take on any of the risk.

Re: Why Did Congress Just Vote to Break Up Big Tech?

#15

Post by snicker7 »

thih9 wrote: post #5

I wonder how the "break-up bill" would be applied in practice for specific companies. Does that mean that e.g. Apple Music would now have to become a separate entity?

It means that "Apple Music" cannot rely on an "online platform" (large online service) owned by Apple.

A more practical example is that Google can't run its ad-tech services in GCP. And Amazon cannot run its online store in AWS. They could, however, use each other's cloud. But not their own.

Re: Why Did Congress Just Vote to Break Up Big Tech?

#16

Post by snicker7 »

veerabadhra wrote: post #13
bigcorp-slave wrote: post #10

[flagged]

The anti trust break up of AT&T led to disruptive innovation, like mass produced cell phones. I personally can't wait for the AI revolution that will occur when Google is broken up. The Big Tech incumbents need to die out, because innovation stagnates in these monopolies.

We also lost Bell labs.

Re: Why Did Congress Just Vote to Break Up Big Tech?

#18

Post by vlovich123 »

ignoramous wrote: post #6

> The ACCESS Act mandates that big tech firms have to make their systems open to competitors and business rivals, in the same way that AT&T customers can talk to T-Mobile customers, or users of different email systems can communicate with one another. Okay, this is plausible, but it can turn into all kinds of mess as federated systems aren't simpler to design, build, or operate. For example, how would Signal inter-co…

Does the ACCESS act require sane pricing/lack of technical hurdles?

For example, AirPlay requires HW chips that aren’t actually needed and could be done in SW. This gives Apple a non trivial economic advantage in the BOM of their products.

Re: Why Did Congress Just Vote to Break Up Big Tech?

#19

Post by kgwgk »

veerabadhra wrote: post #13
bigcorp-slave wrote: post #10

[flagged]

The anti trust break up of AT&T led to disruptive innovation, like mass produced cell phones. I personally can't wait for the AI revolution that will occur when Google is broken up. The Big Tech incumbents need to die out, because innovation stagnates in these monopolies.

> innovation stagnates in these monopolies

Bell Labs managed to come up with a couple of interesting things, though.

Re: Why Did Congress Just Vote to Break Up Big Tech?

#20

Post by wonderwonder »

88840-8855 wrote: post #17

One of the things that I would love to see would be the ban of all those acquisitions that those large firms do. Yet alone the 9bn USD MGM takeover by Amazon was not understandable. Amazon is already too huge. Why are those aqcuisitions allowed?

I hear what you are saying and agree but wonder if this would have the effect of stifling the creation of new companies as so many people start a company with the hope of being acquired.
Post reply on HN