41–50 of 335 posts
How does breaking up Facebook help fight misinformation, polarization, engagement baiting, objectionable content, etc?
> How does breaking up Facebook help fight misinformation, polarization, engagement baiting, objectionable content, etc?
Trust busting can seem like it’s anti free market, but when a company has a monopoly on a network it stops functioning as a company and basically becomes a government. The problem with Facebook/Amazon/Google is that they have a monopoly on a specific information network, for Facebook the social graph, internet discoverability for Google, and online shopping for Amazon. It’s similar to if a single company owned the ro…
A railroad that'd require a toll every mile because you split one company into hundreds wouldn't be viable. If I had to visit multiple web pages to get the same result as a google search, that'd also be bad.
Amazon online shopping has a "monopoly" almost purely because the monopoliness makes it much easier and lower friction than trying to find an online store that is 1) somewhat trustworthy 2) consistent UI 3) ships in a reasonable time 4) isn't going to disappear (and importantly, already has my shipping and payment information). I regularly buy stuff online from elsewhere, but I use Amazon more often because it reduces the cognitive load by centralizing/standardizing everything.
People should educate themselves about decentralization technologies. That's really the direction for resolving these issues. And the first thing you will realize when you start to study them is that in a way the name 'decentralization' is misleading because they are actually the best ways we know of to keep holistic systems. But we get that without the actual physical or organizational centralization and at the same…
We should consider technologies a public good once they go over some threshold of users, they should then eiter be nationalized or regulated as public or broken up.
So then what if social networks capped the number of users at 1 below that threshold? For example, if nationalization occurs at 1 million users, what if all social networks limited the number of accounts to 999,999?. Personally I think that would be awesome. Imagine if every town, city, and borough of very large cities had their own independent social network or networks.
Trust busting can seem like it’s anti free market, but when a company has a monopoly on a network it stops functioning as a company and basically becomes a government. The problem with Facebook/Amazon/Google is that they have a monopoly on a specific information network, for Facebook the social graph, internet discoverability for Google, and online shopping for Amazon. It’s similar to if a single company owned the ro…
A monopoly functions like a government.
Or inverted: a government functions like a monopoly.
I find both angles interesting.
Trust busting can seem like it’s anti free market, but when a company has a monopoly on a network it stops functioning as a company and basically becomes a government. The problem with Facebook/Amazon/Google is that they have a monopoly on a specific information network, for Facebook the social graph, internet discoverability for Google, and online shopping for Amazon. It’s similar to if a single company owned the ro…
But I also think there are major issues with the current configuration of the tech industry! They just aren't because of monopolies. It is not helpful to misdiagnose a real problem. It is not helpful to have only a hammer and call every problem a nail.
Trust busting can seem like it’s anti free market, but when a company has a monopoly on a network it stops functioning as a company and basically becomes a government. The problem with Facebook/Amazon/Google is that they have a monopoly on a specific information network, for Facebook the social graph, internet discoverability for Google, and online shopping for Amazon. It’s similar to if a single company owned the ro…
It's like we're living in some global Orwellian dystopia or some Communist dictatorship.
How are Google and Facebook considered trusts in this context but not Apple? I really must be missing something here.
Trust busting can seem like it’s anti free market, but when a company has a monopoly on a network it stops functioning as a company and basically becomes a government. The problem with Facebook/Amazon/Google is that they have a monopoly on a specific information network, for Facebook the social graph, internet discoverability for Google, and online shopping for Amazon. It’s similar to if a single company owned the ro…
"when a company has a monopoly on a network it... basically becomes a government." A monopoly functions like a government. Or inverted: a government functions like a monopoly. I find both angles interesting.
Trust busting can seem like it’s anti free market, but when a company has a monopoly on a network it stops functioning as a company and basically becomes a government. The problem with Facebook/Amazon/Google is that they have a monopoly on a specific information network, for Facebook the social graph, internet discoverability for Google, and online shopping for Amazon. It’s similar to if a single company owned the ro…