3 ms·

So you seem to be implying that ONE company having a feature is somehow better for public interest than TWO companies having that feature? Or that it is better

So you seem to be implying that ONE company having a feature is somehow better for public interest than TWO companies having that feature? Or that it is better for public interest that people prop up companies with multi billion dollar valuations on the basis of trivially copy-able features?

ouid 9y ago
If that were a complete accounting of the variables then yes, that is what I would be saying. That is not a complete accounting of the variables though. It is harmful to the public interest to allow a company to use its monopoly status as leverage to monopolize other markets. Facebook is competing for image messaging in the same sense that Lance Armstrong was competing in the tour de france. Monopoly is the degenerate case of capitalism, and this kind of behavior by monopolies is how the degeneracy reproduces.