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

We Need to Nationalise Google, Facebook and Amazon

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 237 posts

Re: We Need to Nationalise Google, Facebook and Amazon

#201

Post by kiliantics »

igravious wrote: post #113
visarga wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe nationalization is a bad way to go about it, but these companies are too large, they have too much power over society and society needs to exert power back onto them. So there should be some kind of external oversight when decisions that affect millions of people are being made. I think governments are inefficient and corrupt, but companies are absolutely free to do as they please when deciding how to change pr…

Largest companies by annual revenue[0]: WalMart Stores (US) - $485.8bn State Grid (China) - $315.1bn Sinopec (China) - $267.5bn China Natural Petroleum (China) - $262.6bn Toyota Motor (Japan) - $254.7bn Volkswagen (Germany) - $240.2bn Royal Dutch Shell (Netherlands) - $240bn Berkshire Hathaway (US) - $223.6bn Apple (US) - $215.6bn Exxon Mobil (US) - $205bn None are the big three. Should we nationalize Toyota and Volk…

I think nationalising Walmart is a perfectly reasonable idea. Considering issues like the level of access to quality food in poor neighbourhoods in the US and the fact that US government subsidises much of Walmart's labour cost already, it would be a much better deal for the American people on average.

Re: We Need to Nationalise Google, Facebook and Amazon

#202

Post by hnlmorg »

majewsky wrote: post #156
hnlmorg wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but I'd rather that process happen publically rather than in secret (as would be the default if the Facebook and Google were nationalised). Not that I'm implying there isn't already secret requests for data (if PRISM is to be believed) but at least with the aforementioned being privately owned there is some chance that unlawful / unjust requests for information can be challenged.

> I'd rather that process happen publically rather than in secret (as would be the default if the Facebook and Google were nationalised). You're making it appear as through National Security Letters were public, which they very much are not.

It only appears I'm making that conclusion when you selectively quote small passages from my comment. The very next sentence that follows the portion you quoted starts off by saying:

> "Not that I'm implying there isn't already secret requests for data"

I appreciate that you consider it worth reiterating the point about national security since I had only glossed over it. But I don't appreciate you manipulating my comment to suggest that I was ignoring that point entirely when I quite clearly did raise it.

Re: We Need to Nationalise Google, Facebook and Amazon

#204

Post by hnlmorg »

amelius wrote: post #161
hnlmorg wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The SMTP equivalent for Facebook and Google is HTTP which is a federated protocol. With email anyone can store the content on a centralised server in any format they want. Be that inside an open source RDBMS like MySQL or PostgreSQL, or a flat text file like Postfix defaults, or a proprietary format like Microsoft Exchange does. And the same is true for the services that Facebook and Google offer. The issue here isn'…

Yes, I agree that content silos are a problem. But with IPFS, [1], (which is a federated protocol) you can "host" a HTML file or video or any content without any difficulty yourself. I'm not sure if it would be suitable for the functionality in Facebook though (sharing stuff with friends only), sending messages, so that's part of the reason why we need more research. The network effect of Facebook can be mitigated by…

You could host HTML files et al without any difficulty long before IPFS came along. There are plenty of easy to use web hosts out there aimed at the layman for more than 2 decades. I mean that literally as I have none-IT friends that had sites up on Geocities (and it's equivalent) back in the 90s.

However as much as we could argue the differences between IPFS and the plethora of other hosted solutions all day and night, but ultimately it would be a moot argument because as cool as IPFS is - and I do think it's a genuinely interesting platform - it is still only a platform for serving static content. So it's definitely not suitable for Facebook-like functionality. In that regard IPFS is more akin to Amazon S3 than it is Facebook.

> The network effect of Facebook can be mitigated by introducing laws that open up competition, like the telecommunications acts, which opened up the market for telephony.

While I can't see that happening - or at least not inside my professional life time - it is an interesting point. We've seen monopolies split up before and while Facebook is a long way from being a monopoly it would be interesting to see which line they needed to cross before the government stepped in.

Re: We Need to Nationalise Google, Facebook and Amazon

#205

Post by unityByFreedom »

amelius wrote: post #138
olau wrote: post #17

Actually, I think behind the nationalisation idea, which doesn't seem workable given the circumstances, there's an interesting thought: these companies are sitting on basic infrastructure so instead of treating them like other companies, perhaps we should treat them like utilities. Note that this piece appears in The Guardian. I don't know how it works in the US, but I'm of the impression that in many European countr…

A simple solution is to treat these companies as telcos. We could learn something from history. See e.g. the Mann-Elkins Act (1910), [1]. And the telecommunications acts, [2], [3]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann%E2%80%93Elkins_Act [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Act_of_1934 [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996

> A simple solution is to treat these companies as telcos.

Woh woh woh. Back the truck up. We're not even treating ISPs as common carriers. I mean, we are, but the FCC is about to reverse that.

If that happens we'll all end up paying more for slower access to limited content. It'll be like going back to when you thought AOL or Prodigy was the internet. Even if Google and Facebook were put under greater government supervision, you wouldn't have many options outside of those anyway.

Re: We Need to Nationalise Google, Facebook and Amazon

#206

Post by simonh »

kbart wrote: post #102
simonh wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might look like a silly comment, but it really isn't. Let's say FB was nationalised. So now if you want to contact your local government office you do so through Facebook. The library service is accessed through FB. Drivers Licenses and professional certifications are linked to your FB profile as are medical and criminal records. Government information and services would only be indexed in Google. Amazon would b…

Don't know about other countries, but at least in Lithuania there are laws against such scenarios.

Sure, but in a scenario where the government was so interventionist and controlling that it nationalised a search engine, social engine and retailer how likely is it that such laws would stay on the books?

Re: We Need to Nationalise Google, Facebook and Amazon

#207

Post by jpttsn »

kiliantics wrote: post #196
jpttsn wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That analogy makes sense. So the discussion should be around what makes Facebook as important as e.g. electric power. Personally, I think Facebook is more like a lottery or a tabloid than it is like electric power. Citizens are fine, nay, better off without it. Most arguments e.g. ITT fail to convince me on the critical-ness of Facebook/Google. Instead, the possible harm they cause is brought forward. That's a seriou…

Google is undeniably important to people. And mainly because they've squeezed themselves into every part of our online lives. Facebook is less so, though it has become a platform that many businesses rely on.

It becomes less clearly undeniable once we separate Google into its constituent parts, though.

Is search a utility? How about email? Webmaster tools for SEM? WiFi thermostats?

It seems unfair to blanket classify Google's offerings as utilities, if many of their products and services are just also-rans.

Again, the concentration of power and the strong competitive position of Google can be problems in themselves, whether or not the products are utilities.

Re: We Need to Nationalise Google, Facebook and Amazon

#208

Post by unityByFreedom »

kiliantics wrote: post #196
jpttsn wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That analogy makes sense. So the discussion should be around what makes Facebook as important as e.g. electric power. Personally, I think Facebook is more like a lottery or a tabloid than it is like electric power. Citizens are fine, nay, better off without it. Most arguments e.g. ITT fail to convince me on the critical-ness of Facebook/Google. Instead, the possible harm they cause is brought forward. That's a seriou…

Google is undeniably important to people. And mainly because they've squeezed themselves into every part of our online lives. Facebook is less so, though it has become a platform that many businesses rely on.

> Google is undeniably important to people. And mainly because they've squeezed themselves into every part of our online lives. Facebook is less so, though it has become a platform that many businesses rely on.

But both of these are free. I don't see how comparing these to the expense of early electric power makes sense. Title II classification for ISPs is currently under threat and surprisingly not the focus of this article.

In fact, the article doesn't mention net neutrality or title II classification once. It is odd that it discusses "platform" monopolies without mentioning "broadband" monopolies.

Facebook and Google only charge fees if you want to advertise through them. And, it is pretty cheap unless you're trying to control a nationwide or worldwide narrative.

Re: We Need to Nationalise Google, Facebook and Amazon

#209

Post by unityByFreedom »

How can someone make this argument without considering broadband monopolies? Don't these limit our ability to even access content from the likes of Google, Facebook, or Amazon?

Why should "platform" monopolies be regarded as more important than ISP monopolies?

I'm not trying to say that there aren't platform monopolies. I just don't see the point in making them a higher focus when our ability to even access these platforms is under threat by the current FCC.

Re: We Need to Nationalise Google, Facebook and Amazon

#210

Post by RestlessMind »

I never imagined I would support this position, but after seeing CloudFare CEO disabling a website just because he woke up in a bad mood, I fully support that any corporation should

- either be not allowed to amass quasi-monopolistic power

- or if they want/have to, they should be heavily regulated (eg. utilities) and not allowed to discriminate based on their "values"

Post reply on HN