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

FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 736 posts

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#561

Post by zelly »

Tijdreiziger wrote: post #512
phendrenad2 wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook was smart, it wasn't just a social network, it also was an apps and games platform. Remember Farmville? And also many bands ended up putting their merch and tour dates up on FB because it was just so easy. Then recently it grew a marketplace to take on craigslist and ebay, and added videos (making it a mini youtube or tiktok). And let's not forget that FB groups are the go-to place for many hobbies. Into old…

Don't forget FB Dating!

turns out people didn't want to swipe right on the same website their grandma uses

good lesson in there that some domains just don't mix

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#562

Post by patothon »

jsinai wrote: post #286
patothon wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whatsapp has near universal market penetration globally, especially in countries where most people can’t afford iPhones and use iMessage. do you have data to back up that claim?

Fair point, I should have provided some sort of link. See the graph showing Top Messaging Apps by Country. South America, Africa, Asia is mostly Whatsapp. If you combine FB Messenger and Whatsapp, then FB controls most of the messaging market share in most regions, with a few notable exceptions like WeChat in China. https://www.similarweb.com/corp/blog/mobile-messaging-app-ma... And as an alternative source: https://…

These numbers can't be correct as there is no mention of iMessage who's the biggest chat app in the usa.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#563

Post by ksolanki »

ghufran_syed wrote: post #155

I feel like instead of pushing for the companies to separate, congress should pass laws mandating [adversarial interoperability]( https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interopera... ). Then the data (including the social graph) really would belong to the users, and facebook would have to compete with multiple other “social network clients” that would rapidly emerge. Facebook would lose some monopoly profi…

Yes, can’t we have an email equivalent of social graphs and interaction that can be driven by open standards?

I am sure people have thought about this.

All the Government needs to do is to enforce compliance to such standards.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#564

Post by julianozen »

crazygringo wrote: post #199

Honestly, while I have my doubts about this succeeding, it nevertheless feels like the big tech suit most likely to succeed. Amazon promoting its own brands isn't much different from a supermarket offering its own brand items. Apple isn't a monopoly in phones because of Android. And Google's search is so inherently tied to selling ads as a business model that separating them is a difficult argument -- plus search com…

I agree with the above. I’ll also add that apple and Amazon are two of the most loved American brands. I think Amazon has a higher trust from Americans compared to almost every institution except the US military

Doesn’t seem like a good political move to go after those companies in my opinion. By comparison, Facebook is loathed by both parties for different reasons.

Disclaimer, I used to work at Amazon.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#565

Post by ergocoder »

will_pseudonym wrote: post #531
majani wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, that Whatsapp deal still looks insane. Still no meaningful revenue coming from that end 8 years later

Except the revenue that they potentially would have been losing out on had they not acquired their competitor.

Nobody really knows how much that would be.

But everyone will make up a number to support whatever side of the argument they are on.

In any case, Whatsapp as a standalone company would definitely go bankrupt. The infra cost would be insane with such little revenue.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#566

Post by 8K832d7tNmiQ »

chillacy wrote: post #304
rhizome wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might read up on the Trusts era that brought about the Sherman Act[1]. Trains? Horse carriages and wagons were still available, not to mention boats. However, these are not equal modes of travel, though they are "similar" in that they are transportation , and so it's not about internet-based communities per se. It's the fact that Facebook is "Facebook" that is the problem. That you can't imagine Facebook's equal…

By this definition it seems like every social media app, by virtue of it being different, is a monopoly of its own? Eg: Twitter is “Twitter” that is the problem.

Basically, yeah.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#567

Post by terryf »

Noumenon72 wrote: post #398
njarboe wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure Facebook buys all the data on you that it can, which in America is an amazing amount of information. Your auto mechanic is likely already selling what is being done to your car to CarFax, etc.

Can a consumer buy this data? I suspect I'm getting too many bushings and brake rotors but haven't kept track.

This is an excellent idea! Someone should create a company that buys all the data that is available about people, structures and correlates it and then sells it back to the people

The ironic beauty in that would be awesome. Also, I'd kind of like to get it about myself for similar reasons :)

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#568

Post by aerosmile »

dang wrote: post #701
dang wrote: post #525

There are multiple pages of comments, accessible via the 'More' link at the bottom of the page, or click here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25363366&p=2 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25363366&p=3 (This message will eventually self-destruct.)

This is a stub comment to hold all the replies to the parent. I did not mean to explode an offtopicness charge, and usually turn off replies for these because the same issue comes up every time and the answer is always the same. (When it comes to explaining something, the internet is stateless [1].) Forgot to do so in this case! I'll move them now. [1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

I get it that HN is all about minimal design, but the need for the parent post (in this and other threads) is a sign that the UI could be improved in this aspect.

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#569

Post by pvg »

aerosmile wrote: post #568
dang wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a stub comment to hold all the replies to the parent. I did not mean to explode an offtopicness charge, and usually turn off replies for these because the same issue comes up every time and the answer is always the same. (When it comes to explaining something, the internet is stateless [1].) Forgot to do so in this case! I'll move them now. [1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

I get it that HN is all about minimal design, but the need for the parent post (in this and other threads) is a sign that the UI could be improved in this aspect.

This stuff is for performance reasons:

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

Re: FTC Sues Facebook for Illegal Monopolization

#570

Post by skewart »

quantummkv wrote: post #546
pembrook wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still think you were correct, you just underestimated how long it would take for this to happen if the company was actually competent (unlike MySpace), and all the money that could be made in the meantime. Facebook The Platform's userbase keeps getting older and less engaged, millennials and younger have largely shifted to instagram. Taken by itself, Facebook the platform doesn't have great looking prospects. Insta…

> Now that Zuck is under so much scrutiny, he won't be allowed to acquire the next hot social platform. When instagram isn't the "it" platform anymore, Facebook is doomed. Zuck got around that problem copying competitors lock, stock and barrel and using his monopoly to attempt drive out that competition. Instagram was under threat by two "It" networks. Both of them ended up being copied in Instagram Facebook needs to…

How would breaking up Facebook into three companies fix this though? Suppose Instagram is a separate company and a new competitor starts getting popular. Why wouldn’t Instagram still just copy the competitor’s features?

It’s hard to compete with Instagram because everyone is already on Instagram, not because everyone is also on Facebook. (A lot of IG users don’t use FB much, and vice versa.) A freestanding Instagram could still easily copy and crush competitors.

Post reply on HN