4 ms·

It sounded like she just wanted to call Facebook a utility so she could keep repeating the phrase "utilities get regulated." How about "utilities are typically

It sounded like she just wanted to call Facebook a utility so she could keep repeating the phrase "utilities get regulated." How about "utilities are typically paid for."

stretchwithme 16y ago
good one. the reason utilities are regulated, as I understand it, is that it costs a lot to switch. there's a lot of infrastructure and digging involved. but the last time I switched social networks, I don't think there was much digging involved. and I don't think my neighbors were affected even if something is regulated, coercive regulation is not necessarily justified. people in an area or building can own their local infrastructure together and bargain with competing providers. and such arrangements would be very common if government weren't handing out monopolies
- alanh 16y ago
  Switching social networks by definition “affects your neighbors.” That’s why so many people feel trapped — the value of Facebook is the connections we have made there over time.
  - stretchwithme 16y ago
    trapped? or addicted? seriously, if you're going to lose them if you leave facebook, they may not actually be your friends. and haven't we all been through this before? I do recall leaving friendster for myspace and then myspace for facebook. I can't recall thinking that the government should have stopped that from from happening. which is the real reason for regulation/monopoly. keeping those pesky competitors out of the picture while pretending its to protect the customers.
jrockway 16y ago
A public utility can still harm you, even if they aren't competent enough to make any money off of you. If anything, Facebook is so desperate for revenue that they might be willing to "push the envelope" in a way that directly harms you. Anyway, I don't care, because I don't use Facebook. But a lot of people are being strung along in ways they don't understand, and that's generally a bad thing. (It's also bad for me -- if everyone is willing to give up their privacy in exchange for pictures of their friends drinking beer, it means it will become socially unacceptable for other people to want privacy. And that is bad for me -- someone who does want privacy.)
- coderdude 16y ago
  Water, electricity, natural gas, and Facebook? I just don't think we can classify Facebook as a utility (in the sense suggested in the article), no matter how useful it is to so many people. We don't pay for it and we don't need it.
  - mattmanser 16y ago
    I don't pay for radio stations and yet I bet they're regulated. Arguments that rely on 'it's free' are weak. Just because much of the web is free, with it's low running costs, doesn't mean that it shouldn't be regulated. News sites are covered by plenty of regulation just because they originally came out of print media. Although I agree calling it a utility is wrong to try and convince people it should be regulated. It's only a matter of time before facebook gets thwacked with regulation over here in the EU. Not because it's a utility but because it can cause so much social harm with its desire to make money. The bait and switch going on at facebook should definitely be stopped.
    - scott_s 16y ago
      Radio stations are granted access to a public resource: the airwaves. Hence they are subject to regulation. That doesn't map well to the current discussion.
  - barrkel 16y ago
    How about "phone book"? You can't deny there are network effects. How sticky the network effects end up being is questionable, but denying them is stupid.
- natrius 16y ago
  > But a lot of people are being strung along in ways they don't understand This is a pretty big assumption. Care to cite it?
  - jrockway 16y ago
    Sure. I can visit a webpage to see who on Facebook is having rectal surgery surgery today. But I bet each person that used the words "rectal surgery" in their status update didn't really want me to know that -- Facebook took their private information and made it available to me without their consent. This is mostly embarrassing rather than harmful, but I think you get the idea. (And sure, you can say they consented when they signed up for Facebook and didn't opt out of whatever you're supposed to opt out. Doesn't mean they aren't embarrassed.)

It sounded like she just wanted to call Facebook a utility so she could keep repeating the phrase "utilities get regulated." How about "utilities are typically paid for."

stretchwithme 16y ago

good one. the reason utilities are regulated, as I understand it, is that it costs a lot to switch. there's a lot of infrastructure and digging involved. but the last time I switched social networks, I don't think there was much digging involved. and I don't think my neighbors were affected even if something is regulated, coercive regulation is not necessarily justified. people in an area or building can own their local infrastructure together and bargain with competing providers. and such arrangements would be very common if government weren't handing out monopolies

alanh 16y ago
Switching social networks by definition “affects your neighbors.” That’s why so many people feel trapped — the value of Facebook is the connections we have made there over time.
- stretchwithme 16y ago
  trapped? or addicted? seriously, if you're going to lose them if you leave facebook, they may not actually be your friends. and haven't we all been through this before? I do recall leaving friendster for myspace and then myspace for facebook. I can't recall thinking that the government should have stopped that from from happening. which is the real reason for regulation/monopoly. keeping those pesky competitors out of the picture while pretending its to protect the customers.

jrockway 16y ago

A public utility can still harm you, even if they aren't competent enough to make any money off of you. If anything, Facebook is so desperate for revenue that they might be willing to "push the envelope" in a way that directly harms you. Anyway, I don't care, because I don't use Facebook. But a lot of people are being strung along in ways they don't understand, and that's generally a bad thing. (It's also bad for me -- if everyone is willing to give up their privacy in exchange for pictures of their friends drinking beer, it means it will become socially unacceptable for other people to want privacy. And that is bad for me -- someone who does want privacy.)

coderdude 16y ago
Water, electricity, natural gas, and Facebook? I just don't think we can classify Facebook as a utility (in the sense suggested in the article), no matter how useful it is to so many people. We don't pay for it and we don't need it.
- mattmanser 16y ago
  I don't pay for radio stations and yet I bet they're regulated. Arguments that rely on 'it's free' are weak. Just because much of the web is free, with it's low running costs, doesn't mean that it shouldn't be regulated. News sites are covered by plenty of regulation just because they originally came out of print media. Although I agree calling it a utility is wrong to try and convince people it should be regulated. It's only a matter of time before facebook gets thwacked with regulation over here in the EU. Not because it's a utility but because it can cause so much social harm with its desire to make money. The bait and switch going on at facebook should definitely be stopped.
  - scott_s 16y ago
    Radio stations are granted access to a public resource: the airwaves. Hence they are subject to regulation. That doesn't map well to the current discussion.
- barrkel 16y ago
  How about "phone book"? You can't deny there are network effects. How sticky the network effects end up being is questionable, but denying them is stupid.
natrius 16y ago
> But a lot of people are being strung along in ways they don't understand This is a pretty big assumption. Care to cite it?
- jrockway 16y ago
  Sure. I can visit a webpage to see who on Facebook is having rectal surgery surgery today. But I bet each person that used the words "rectal surgery" in their status update didn't really want me to know that -- Facebook took their private information and made it available to me without their consent. This is mostly embarrassing rather than harmful, but I think you get the idea. (And sure, you can say they consented when they signed up for Facebook and didn't opt out of whatever you're supposed to opt out. Doesn't mean they aren't embarrassed.)