Facebook and Google Are Not Public Utilities • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook and Google Are Not Public Utilities

#41

Post by pb7 » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 4:34 PM UTC

dahfizz wrote: post #40

pb7 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Net neutrality doesn't exist so ISPs can decide to arbitrarily block access to social media giants, or any other site, altogether. That is the bigger problem. Anyone going after Google and Facebook but not ISPs has an agenda.

> ISPs can decide to arbitrarily block access to social media giants, or any other site, altogether. That is the bigger problem. How is that the _bigger_ problem? This is entirely theoretical. ISPs have not done anything like that yet because it doesn't make any sense for them to. Big tech, on the other hand, have shown that they are more than willing and able to destroy any platform they don't like. Big Tech has as…

One controls access to the internet. The other controls a subset of platforms on the internet.

I know which one has more power.

Re: Facebook and Google Are Not Public Utilities

#42

Post by xyzzy21 » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 4:44 PM UTC

They absolutely ARE fascist collaborators with the government. That's related to public utility monopolies but not strictly the same.

Re: Facebook and Google Are Not Public Utilities

#43

Post by j_walter » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 4:45 PM UTC

kevinventullo wrote: post #38

j_walter wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is local governments are not competent enough to do so...and even if they figure out how to do so it's at a large multiplier of the cost of any major ISP. https://municipalbroadbandpdx.org/home There is a link to getting local broadband in Portland...it's a total mess and waste of money.

It depends. I’ve only heard good things from my parents about the municipal offerings in my hometown in rural-ish Iowa. Cheaper, faster, better customer service than the existing private ISP I had growing up.

I'm sure it depends on the size and efficiency of the municipality...but the ones around Portland are about as incompetent as they come.

Don't forget that many are subsidized...so yes what they are paying monthly may seem to be cheaper there is probably tax money being funneled to that municipality for offering broadband as well.

https://ocio.iowa.gov/broadband-grants

Lots of money being thrown at the startup costs...

Honestly they might be better off using that money to buy everyone StarLink dishes...the speeds are going to be better than what a lot of them are getting.

Re: Facebook and Google Are Not Public Utilities

#44

Post by daveslash » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 4:45 PM UTC

jankotek wrote: post #20

Many public institutions treat Google as public utility. Children can not attend school, unless they agree to privacy policy on school issued Chromebook. Town hall meetings announcements are only on FB... If those are not public utilities, there should be law to prevent public institutions from using them. I always seen it as public threat that politicians are on private social media, what if private company declares…

This is a good point. Perhaps they're a utility and/or common-carrier only in certain contexts? The article points out "Public utility comes from a contractual relationship between the government and that entity that is supposed to be the public utility". Other's have pointed out that when government employees use Google search, there's no contract in place. The latter may be true, but I'd argue that there is a contract in place when schools are paying for the Google Apps service and Chromebook hardware.

If you have to use the Google products in a school, and the school has a contract with Google, that seems like a utility and/or common carrier. The analogy that I use with my friends is "You have Verizon for your mobile phone, yeah? I have ATT. We can call/text each other, right? Of course - that's how phones work. What would you think if you could ONLY call Verizon customers, and if you wanted to call/text me, you had to get an ATT phone? And what about all those land lines, customer service lines, etc... how annoying would it be if everyone had to have the same phone company, and the companies kept coming and going in and out of vogue? All the older people user Company X, Millennials are all on Y, and the kids are all about Z...."

Most people think that's an awful, terrible world to imagine. That said, it reminds me a little of Neil Stephenson's "Snow Crash" ~ one review says "Snow Crash is a mind-altering romp through a future America so bizarre, so outrageous.... you'll recognize it immediately"

Re: Facebook and Google Are Not Public Utilities

#45

Post by pope_meat » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 4:46 PM UTC

j_walter wrote: post #29

Apocryphon wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like it's easier for local governments to set up their own public broadband services than their own competing big tech companies. And there's been plenty coverage of the fight for public broadband and the pushback from monopolistic ISPs.

The problem is local governments are not competent enough to do so...and even if they figure out how to do so it's at a large multiplier of the cost of any major ISP. https://municipalbroadbandpdx.org/home There is a link to getting local broadband in Portland...it's a total mess and waste of money.

That looks like a brand new project, the feasibility study is from Sept 2020, so I don't know if it's quite time to gauge competency of anything?

Re: Facebook and Google Are Not Public Utilities

#46

Post by thayne » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 4:49 PM UTC

xiaq wrote: post #39

amyjess wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only services I've seen competitors provide via LLU are ADSL, back when ADSL was still a viable competitor to cable. But I've never seen any competitors offer service over a cable, VDSL, or other fiber network, and those are the only kinds of wired Internet service that are really viable anymore.

IIUC, cables are not subject to LLU in the UK (Virgin Media being the only cable ISP) but fibres are. Competition from fibre probably keeps cable Internet price reasonable enough.

In the US, fiber, at least last mile fiber is pretty rare. It is limited to a few small pockets in primarily large urban areas.

Re: Facebook and Google Are Not Public Utilities

#47

Post by j_walter » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 4:52 PM UTC

pope_meat wrote: post #45

j_walter wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is local governments are not competent enough to do so...and even if they figure out how to do so it's at a large multiplier of the cost of any major ISP. https://municipalbroadbandpdx.org/home There is a link to getting local broadband in Portland...it's a total mess and waste of money.

That looks like a brand new project, the feasibility study is from Sept 2020, so I don't know if it's quite time to gauge competency of anything?

Feasibility study concluded in Sept 2020 (it started in 2019)...but lots of money has been spent already and with little to show for it.

The MBPDX organization was started in late 2017...and they still don't even have a "team" listed on their website.

Re: Facebook and Google Are Not Public Utilities

#48

Post by TeeMassive » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 4:53 PM UTC

throw149102 wrote: post #19

As an aside, I'm really beginning to dislike titles for articles that have that dismissive tone of "This is my fact and I'm going to tell it to you". I know the reason they have to do this is that having a reasonable title won't get any clicks, but perhaps that's a sign I should just be disregarding places that are only looking for clicks in the first place. I think I'm going to mostly focus on smaller creators, sing…

> I know the reason they have to do this is that having a reasonable title won't get any clicks

A title that says its conclusion is less interesting to me. First if I know the conclusion then what's the point of reading the story and secondly the story is more likely to be an influence campaign than an actual researched opinion.

For example: "What are public utilities and how it applies to Big Tech" sounds a lot more like an article worth my time reading.

Re: Facebook and Google Are Not Public Utilities

#49

Post by unknownOrigin » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 4:58 PM UTC

They're not public utilities. They're a cartel.

Re: Facebook and Google Are Not Public Utilities

#50

Post by TeeMassive » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 4:59 PM UTC

Most people could not live their daily life without a Google/Facebook/Apple account. In social media has become the de facto place to reach and be reached by government officials and the information there is more up to date and well organized and targeted. For all practical purposes they are public utilities.

Also the owner of Wired is Advance, which own Reddit. They have a vested interest in not seeing that kind of legislation pass.