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

Facebook Can’t Be Fixed, It Needs to Be Broken Up

thedailybeast.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 114 posts

Re: Facebook Can’t Be Fixed, It Needs to Be Broken Up

#21

Post by apotheothesomai »

unicornporn wrote: post #4
downer61 wrote: post #2

This is basically the worst possible course of action. Facebook is neither a utility nor monopoly. Facebook will be irrelevant in a generation or less. Even if Facebook manages to leverage the network effect of its alternative subsidiaries, there will always be the treadmill of evolving trends, and there’s not such thing as one true mode of electronic social interaction.

> Facebook will be irrelevant in a generation or less. A lot of harm can be done in one generation. Don't you think the history shows us that?

What history teaches us is that past generations have been ruined by serious things, like war, political upheaval, disease, and economic collapse, not by a frivolity in their social lives like FB.

Modern marketing has ensured that everyone in the US born after the'80s has grown up in an environment of marketing saturation, but modern marketing/propaganda was invented in the early 20th century. (Thanks, Edward Bernays) It changed our lives and the way we think, from Fascist propaganda to Coldwar rhetoric, and to the belief that orange juice is a breakfast drink and the engagement ring is a thing.

FB is one of thousands of powerful entities continuing the tradition, but of course, data mining has reached obscene levels, but FB is only one of many players.

Re: Facebook Can’t Be Fixed, It Needs to Be Broken Up

#22

Post by millstone »

downer61 wrote: post #2

This is basically the worst possible course of action. Facebook is neither a utility nor monopoly. Facebook will be irrelevant in a generation or less. Even if Facebook manages to leverage the network effect of its alternative subsidiaries, there will always be the treadmill of evolving trends, and there’s not such thing as one true mode of electronic social interaction.

Maybe Facebook.com fades to irrelevant, but Facebook.the.company evolves to dominate that treadmill, purchasing or replicating any threats for a long period. In this scenario Facebook is not a classical static monopoly protecting its rentier status, but instead a dynamic monopoly whose massive resources enable it to leapfrog from one trend to the next. Facebook-the-company is clearly aware of the history of its predecessors and is poised to pivot.

Re: Facebook Can’t Be Fixed, It Needs to Be Broken Up

#23

Post by Slansitartop »

barkingtoad wrote: post #11
downer61 wrote: post #2

This is basically the worst possible course of action. Facebook is neither a utility nor monopoly. Facebook will be irrelevant in a generation or less. Even if Facebook manages to leverage the network effect of its alternative subsidiaries, there will always be the treadmill of evolving trends, and there’s not such thing as one true mode of electronic social interaction.

I'm trying to think of what it is, exactly, that Facebook has a monopoly on. The nearest I can come up with is: Facebook has a monopoly on Facebook users. The followup question would be: how can that be broken up?

> I'm trying to think of what it is, exactly, that Facebook has a monopoly on. The nearest I can come up with is: Facebook has a monopoly on Facebook users.

Perhaps Facebook could be thought of as a monopoly because 1) it has no clear, direct competitors, and 2) it's taken action to buy up anything that could become one [1]?

[1] successfully with Instagram and WhatsApp, and attempted with SnapChat

> The followup question would be: how can that be broken up?

It could be divested of Instagram and WhatsApp, for starters. I think its core facebook.com could also be split up in a way to increase competition further: randomly divide its users between multiple successor networks with a mandate to provide an open API for inter-operation.

Re: Facebook Can’t Be Fixed, It Needs to Be Broken Up

#24

Post by wvenable »

saudioger wrote: post #13
barkingtoad wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trying to think of what it is, exactly, that Facebook has a monopoly on. The nearest I can come up with is: Facebook has a monopoly on Facebook users. The followup question would be: how can that be broken up?

You could spin off an easy dozen companies out of existing Facebook services.

Seems somewhat ridiculous to allow companies to acquire other companies/services just to force them to spin them off.

I'm for regulation, if you can come up with sensible ones. But targeting a specific company to be split up doesn't seem like it actually solved the problem in the long run. I mean look what happened with AT&T -- we're almost back to complete consolidation again.

Re: Facebook Can’t Be Fixed, It Needs to Be Broken Up

#27

Post by ovao »

unicornporn wrote: post #4
downer61 wrote: post #2

This is basically the worst possible course of action. Facebook is neither a utility nor monopoly. Facebook will be irrelevant in a generation or less. Even if Facebook manages to leverage the network effect of its alternative subsidiaries, there will always be the treadmill of evolving trends, and there’s not such thing as one true mode of electronic social interaction.

> Facebook will be irrelevant in a generation or less. A lot of harm can be done in one generation. Don't you think the history shows us that?

While true, I think it’s worth remembering that history is being written constantly. Facebook’s position and scale has no precedence, and we’re just now really beginning to understand what the consequences of such a position can be. Today’s event was historic in its own right (even though I think it was mostly unproductive).

We’ll emerge from this a little wiser, and maybe with some new regulations. Whether regulation is good or bad I can’t say, but this is all very much a learning process as a society and, to some potentially great extent, as an industry.

Frankly, I think crossing this line was necessary.

Re: Facebook Can’t Be Fixed, It Needs to Be Broken Up

#28

Post by BurningFrog »

Slansitartop wrote: post #23
barkingtoad wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trying to think of what it is, exactly, that Facebook has a monopoly on. The nearest I can come up with is: Facebook has a monopoly on Facebook users. The followup question would be: how can that be broken up?

> I'm trying to think of what it is, exactly, that Facebook has a monopoly on. The nearest I can come up with is: Facebook has a monopoly on Facebook users. Perhaps Facebook could be thought of as a monopoly because 1) it has no clear, direct competitors, and 2) it's taken action to buy up anything that could become one [1]? [1] successfully with Instagram and WhatsApp, and attempted with SnapChat > The followup ques…

Even if you accept that, if FB buys up any aspiring competitors, that makes it profitable to compete with it.

Re: Facebook Can’t Be Fixed, It Needs to Be Broken Up

#30

Post by Slansitartop »

dingo_bat wrote: post #25

Let's break up Google too while we are at it. They exert far too much influence via Google search and YouTube and Android.

I agree. The momentum seems to be focused on Facebook mainly because they played it too fast and loose for too long. But many of the issues that apply to Facebook apply to Google as well, but it just hasn't provided as much reason for this level of scrutiny.
Post reply on HN