Google and Facebook are monopolies. Does it matter? [audio] • Hacker News Board

Re: Google and Facebook are monopolies. Does it matter? [audio]

#21

Post by PavlovsCat » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 4:23 PM UTC

thwy12321 wrote: post #7

These companies could disappear over night. Is being a monopoly for a decade really a big deal? It's completely over hyped how much control they have, for now they are dominant, but five years from now its entirely possible that they arent. Also, they have produced so much for the world of technology, essentially creating all of the big data infrastructure technology, and (bare with me here) react which is having a m…

> These companies could disappear over night. Is being a monopoly for a decade really a big deal?

They could also not disappear. Is being a monopoly forever really a big deal?

> they have produced so much for the world of technology

As did and do so many others. What of what they made could not have been made with ethical behavior, or more competition?

> they have produced so much for the world of technology [..] This whole monopoly business is so overplayed.

Nobody said a monopoly cannot have any positive effect besides the negative ones. Refuting one argument, and one that nobody even makes, doesn't prove that anything is "completely hyped". That would require not just refuting one actual argument, but all of them, hence "completely".

How would you compare it with the opportunity costs, with "what could have been instead?" We usually consider that zero, because it can't be simply measured. That doesn't mean there wouldn't have been anything, or just more Microsoft and IBM, so to speak. It's like weighing two things against each other, and the one scale is welded to the frame.

Insofar competition leads to innovation, your one argument [for a monopoly being good] kinda backfires. They did that with barely having to try; imagine what they could do if they did have to try.

Re: Google and Facebook are monopolies. Does it matter? [audio]

#22

Post by umvi » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 4:24 PM UTC

ProAm wrote: post #17

umvi wrote: post #3

If they are, they are not a traditional monopolies. Traditional monopolies "control supply of a good or service, and where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted." In this case, the supply of a good or service (social networking, webpage indexing and searching) are not controlled by Facebook and Google because they aren't finite resources. Anyone can index the web and anyone can build a social n…

> where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted. Is there a term for when a new entry can be easily killed if the other party simply decides to duplicate their product/service/offering? Google and FB do not prevent entry, but they sure can kill new entrants easily with funding. See Instagram implementing 'Stories' which killed Vine. See Twitter Periscope killing Merekat, etc.....

I'm not an expert, but I believe that's why patents and trade secrets exist - to protect your product from simply being cloned. If your product has no secret sauce or patent-worthy mechanism, why shouldn't it be cloned?

Re: Google and Facebook are monopolies. Does it matter? [audio]

#23

Post by leetcrew » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 4:24 PM UTC

ProAm wrote: post #17

umvi wrote: post #3

If they are, they are not a traditional monopolies. Traditional monopolies "control supply of a good or service, and where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted." In this case, the supply of a good or service (social networking, webpage indexing and searching) are not controlled by Facebook and Google because they aren't finite resources. Anyone can index the web and anyone can build a social n…

> where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted. Is there a term for when a new entry can be easily killed if the other party simply decides to duplicate their product/service/offering? Google and FB do not prevent entry, but they sure can kill new entrants easily with funding. See Instagram implementing 'Stories' which killed Vine. See Twitter Periscope killing Merekat, etc.....

the end goal of antitrust rules is (or should be) protecting consumers. if Facebook can kill your startup by adding a couple features to their platform, it implies that users would rather have the feature on Facebook than on a standalone platform, so they are probably not being hurt. if Facebook does the same thing and then charges money for the feature after your startup goes under, maybe the users are getting the short end of the stick.

Re: Google and Facebook are monopolies. Does it matter? [audio]

#24

Post by will_brown » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 4:28 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #3

If they are, they are not a traditional monopolies. Traditional monopolies "control supply of a good or service, and where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted." In this case, the supply of a good or service (social networking, webpage indexing and searching) are not controlled by Facebook and Google because they aren't finite resources. Anyone can index the web and anyone can build a social n…

>Traditional monopolies "control supply of a good or service, and where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted."

Well Courts have ruled the NFL is a monopoly...but there is no control over new entities organizing and playing football games (i.e. not prevented or highly controlled).

Re: Google and Facebook are monopolies. Does it matter? [audio]

#25

Post by yogthos » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 4:31 PM UTC

Of course it matters because these companies play a huge role in how we use the internet. Facebook is creating a walled garden for their users where they want to have their own closed version of the internet that they control. Google wants to become the gatekeeper of the internet and get to decide what websites people can view. AMP is a perfect example of Google using their monopoly power to force websites in that direction.

Re: Google and Facebook are monopolies. Does it matter? [audio]

#26

Post by ghobs91 » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 4:32 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #3

If they are, they are not a traditional monopolies. Traditional monopolies "control supply of a good or service, and where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted." In this case, the supply of a good or service (social networking, webpage indexing and searching) are not controlled by Facebook and Google because they aren't finite resources. Anyone can index the web and anyone can build a social n…

If anything, we need to update the definition of the existing term to include the new manifestations of monopolies that tech companies can form.

While Google and Facebook don't control a finite resource in the traditional sense, they do in the sense of mindshare, which is absolutely a finite resource.

Re: Google and Facebook are monopolies. Does it matter? [audio]

#27

Post by tokyodude » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 4:33 PM UTC

belorn wrote: post #11

umvi wrote: post #3

If they are, they are not a traditional monopolies. Traditional monopolies "control supply of a good or service, and where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted." In this case, the supply of a good or service (social networking, webpage indexing and searching) are not controlled by Facebook and Google because they aren't finite resources. Anyone can index the web and anyone can build a social n…

The service google and facebook provide is access to their captured audience. In the case of google that is the advertisement market with search and the platform of youtube. It is rather commonly known that many video producers are extremely unhappy using youtube but feel locked in since thats where the audience is, and the audience is equally locked in since youtube is where the producers are. New video platforms po…

And yet Netflix seems to be doing fine delivering video and competing with Youtube for users?

Re: Google and Facebook are monopolies. Does it matter? [audio]

#28

Post by tokyodude » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 4:35 PM UTC

will_brown wrote: post #24

umvi wrote: post #3

If they are, they are not a traditional monopolies. Traditional monopolies "control supply of a good or service, and where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted." In this case, the supply of a good or service (social networking, webpage indexing and searching) are not controlled by Facebook and Google because they aren't finite resources. Anyone can index the web and anyone can build a social n…

>Traditional monopolies "control supply of a good or service, and where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted." Well Courts have ruled the NFL is a monopoly...but there is no control over new entities organizing and playing football games (i.e. not prevented or highly controlled).

Is that really true? I guess I'd assume the NFL have exclusive contracts with most cities for their stadiums and for teams as in they probably have a contract that disallows the city from having another team?

Re: Google and Facebook are monopolies. Does it matter? [audio]

#29

Post by fokov » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 4:36 PM UTC

belorn wrote: post #11

umvi wrote: post #3

If they are, they are not a traditional monopolies. Traditional monopolies "control supply of a good or service, and where the entry of new producers is prevented or highly restricted." In this case, the supply of a good or service (social networking, webpage indexing and searching) are not controlled by Facebook and Google because they aren't finite resources. Anyone can index the web and anyone can build a social n…

The service google and facebook provide is access to their captured audience. In the case of google that is the advertisement market with search and the platform of youtube. It is rather commonly known that many video producers are extremely unhappy using youtube but feel locked in since thats where the audience is, and the audience is equally locked in since youtube is where the producers are. New video platforms po…

Replace YouTube with network TV vs cable in the early days. There is a way past YouTube but people must be willing to adapt and/or take the hit building the next thing. Most of the best TV shows have been from network and especially the premium ones like HBO, Showtime, and now Netflix.

However, it took many years to get here and most people probably can't afford to compete without net neutrality.

Re: Google and Facebook are monopolies. Does it matter? [audio]

#30

Post by blakesterz » Thu, Nov 15, 2018, 4:36 PM UTC

I guess we won't know for a few years still, but it seems like we're seeing the decline of the Facebook monopoly now. At least in terms of Facebook.com, maybe not all the things they own, but just Facebook as a social site. There seems to be soooo much going wrong for them on so many levels right now, it would surprise me if we're still talking about them in the same terms in 3-5 years.