3 ms·
There are a largish number of issues converging here. Broadly the naive idea that power and control is used for good needs to be jettisoned. It only seeks its o
by throw2016 9y ago
There are a largish number of issues converging here. Broadly the naive idea that power and control is used for good needs to be jettisoned. It only seeks its own concentration with negative outcomes for everyone else, and thus requires societal intervention before it becomes a problem.
Neither Google or Facebook are innovative. Search is not innovation, for Google efficient, yes. Facebook is timing. The bulk of the hard work in computing is the result of decades of work by academics funded by the public. TCP/IP is the innovation. So market fundamentalists prone to come in when all the hard work is done and see perfect markets everywhere have little ground for complaints about innovation.
You can already see abuse of power in Google and Facebook. Zuckerberg's political ambitions will prevent egregious bad behavior for now but that just underlines the potential for abuse.
There are other issues too. Lobbying, inability to apply anti-competitive laws - amp is a glaring problem, and the wild west situation with tracking and user data, there needs to be some control and constraints here. You need to create a level playing field where disruption becomes possible and problems can be addressed by market forces before they take the field with them.
- plandis 9y agoI honestly don't know how you can say that Facebook and Google are not innovative companies. Googles search beat out lots of other companies. Their search was innovative, their business model was innovative. Facebook convienced millions (billions?) of people to share their information on the internet. That's not innovative? You're effectively saying that the person who has the initial idea is the innovator, not that one that brings it to success. I'd argue that if anything it's the successful implementor that's innovative.