gnidrologs (![[info]](http://klab.lv/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} gnidrologs) rakstīja,@ 2018-08-20 16:15:00 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
pārdomas par the great internet purge
Btw, look back a in the 90s: Janet Reno was fining Microsoft $1 million dollars a day for bundling Windows with Internet Explorer.
But now look at Google: Operating systems, phones, search engines, browsers, internet service, GPS satellite tracking, traffic monitoring, social network, email, Youtube, the largest ad network etc etc etc.
That's such a monopoly it makes most previous antitrust cases look ridiculous.
...
Again, it's like someone built a great big highway through town and then suddenly said no allowed after everyone had become accustomed to it. Sure, you can take all the back roads, but your competition is using the highway. And the fact that there's already a highway means that a new one isn't likely to be built as most people are satisfied with the current one. And even if you could afford to build a new highway, which you probably can't, the people who made this highway can afford to sabotage you and try to cut you out so that you can't build your own.
...
Yeah, my main concern is that the government has shifted from trying to stop companies from becoming too big back in the early 20th century to seeing companies becoming too big as a good thing, since if the company does whatever the government wants, that size becomes an asset.
That broadly seems to be why the government hasn't stepped in with Google: they're working for the government, so why bother?
Reality is quickly becoming one huge blackpill. I'm not sure what to suggest as an out at this point, short of revolution, which I always avoid talking about because its both impractical and likely to cause more harm than good.
Btw, look back a in the 90s: Janet Reno was fining Microsoft $1 million dollars a day for bundling Windows with Internet Explorer.
But now look at Google: Operating systems, phones, search engines, browsers, internet service, GPS satellite tracking, traffic monitoring, social network, email, Youtube, the largest ad network etc etc etc.
That's such a monopoly it makes most previous antitrust cases look ridiculous.
...
Again, it's like someone built a great big highway through town and then suddenly said no
...
Yeah, my main concern is that the government has shifted from trying to stop companies from becoming too big back in the early 20th century to seeing companies becoming too big as a good thing, since if the company does whatever the government wants, that size becomes an asset.
That broadly seems to be why the government hasn't stepped in with Google: they're working for the government, so why bother?
Reality is quickly becoming one huge blackpill. I'm not sure what to suggest as an out at this point, short of revolution, which I always avoid talking about because its both impractical and likely to cause more harm than good.
