3 ms·

>you need to end any ADDITIONAL regulations Isn't that what the new administration promises? Deregulation and ending net neutrality. I don't like monopolies ei

by danjoc 10y ago

>you need to end any ADDITIONAL regulations Isn't that what the new administration promises? Deregulation and ending net neutrality. I don't like monopolies either, but it's not like Google/Apple/Facebook/Amazon don't have them. They have all the patents in the world to bludgeon telecom operators to death if those operators tried to start their own competing social networks or search engines.

nickthemagicman 10y ago
I disagree. Theres no monopolies on ad revenue or search? Anyways, 'the free market' is usually just an excuse for politicians to justify favoritsm to certain groups and has nothing to do with actually working to make markets free and healthy.
- gm-conspiracy 10y ago
  There is this (which Google licensed from Yahoo/Overture/Go): https://www.google.com/patents/US6269361 https://www.google.com/patents/US6269361 and then there are the patents filed by Friendster, that Facebook later acquired: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/pda/2010/aug/05/facebook-friendster-patents https://www.theguardian.com/technology/pda/2010/aug/05/faceb...
at-fates-hands 10y ago
>> Isn't that what the new administration promises? Deregulation and ending net neutrality. As far as I know, this is the case. It would be similar to what happened in telecom when a lot of the regional Bell operators were deregulated in the early aughts. A ton of CLECS were created (competitive local exchange carriers) who then had the opportunity to lease copper from Qwest at cost, and then become re-sellers to their clients. What happened was predictable and would happen again if you did the same with Comcast and other cable/internet operators. You'd get a gold rush of companies looking to lease their networks, low-ball their clients and appear to be a much lower cost alternative. Customers will flock to them, and within 5-8 years, many will go under (poor management, losing margins on cost, etc) many will merge together and a few will ultimately survive if they're fiscally responsible enough. In the early 2000's there were something like two dozen CLECS here in Minnesota. Today, there's around 5.

by danjoc 10y ago

nickthemagicman 10y ago

I disagree. Theres no monopolies on ad revenue or search? Anyways, 'the free market' is usually just an excuse for politicians to justify favoritsm to certain groups and has nothing to do with actually working to make markets free and healthy.

gm-conspiracy 10y ago
There is this (which Google licensed from Yahoo/Overture/Go): https://www.google.com/patents/US6269361 https://www.google.com/patents/US6269361 and then there are the patents filed by Friendster, that Facebook later acquired: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/pda/2010/aug/05/facebook-friendster-patents https://www.theguardian.com/technology/pda/2010/aug/05/faceb...

at-fates-hands 10y ago

>> Isn't that what the new administration promises? Deregulation and ending net neutrality. As far as I know, this is the case. It would be similar to what happened in telecom when a lot of the regional Bell operators were deregulated in the early aughts. A ton of CLECS were created (competitive local exchange carriers) who then had the opportunity to lease copper from Qwest at cost, and then become re-sellers to their clients. What happened was predictable and would happen again if you did the same with Comcast and other cable/internet operators. You'd get a gold rush of companies looking to lease their networks, low-ball their clients and appear to be a much lower cost alternative. Customers will flock to them, and within 5-8 years, many will go under (poor management, losing margins on cost, etc) many will merge together and a few will ultimately survive if they're fiscally responsible enough. In the early 2000's there were something like two dozen CLECS here in Minnesota. Today, there's around 5.