3 ms·
I've wondered such things myself, but it sorta depends on the industry as to where the limit should or could be. It's one thing to have multiple search or emai
by cknight 9y ago
I've wondered such things myself, but it sorta depends on the industry as to where the limit should or could be.
It's one thing to have multiple search or email providers, but how many companies can afford the investment for a new silicon fabrication plant? Or to construct a new airliner that meets our reliability and safety needs? Some industries seem to require immense sizes for the entities to be viable at all.
And when it comes to Facebook, I mean, we can't split this up like we did with Standard Oil. People want to be connected. Not unless we mandated some kind of social networking standard that could federate...
- SomeStupidPoint 9y agoIn what way is Facebook more complicated to split up than Ma Bell was?
- cknight 9y agoCorrect me if I'm wrong, but the impression I get from Standard Oil and Bell is that each big company essentially just had to duplicate its administrative tier and give each one its own branding, and then things (mostly) continued on as normal at the subsequently carved-up logistical and physical levels. It seems to me that if we were to change Facebook from its own platform to an XMPP- or email-style federated network, then such a network would have to be constructed in the first place. Not saying it can't (or shouldn't) be done, but I do believe it is a more complex example than Standard Oil or Bell. We've also got international borders and regulations in the mix.
- sogen 9y agoAPI?
- mhh__ 9y ago> And when it comes to Facebook, I mean, we can't split this up like we did with Standard Oil. People want to be connected. Hence, email? It can be done.