4 ms·

The problem here is that this is the exact opposite of what's going on - the competitive advantage of many smaller companies these days is that they are not eve

The problem here is that this is the exact opposite of what's going on - the competitive advantage of many smaller companies these days is that they are not even close to being compliant with regulations but platforms often tolerate them because they are not responsible for counterparty compliance. If you do however put that onus on the platforms, then it's entirely predictable that platforms will cut ties with small businesses. This is more or less what happened with GDPR - lots of small ad-tech players became large liabilities for others in the value chain, leading to more consolidation in the industry. Outside of technology, it's common for certain types of services or tools not to be made aware to small-time customers. The technology industry at large and the large tech companies in particular have so far bucked this trend in a way that created a huge amount of value for the world at large, but this doesn't have to be this way.

google_censors 8y ago
The real problem here is that Facebook is operating in an area where it doesn't have a license and didn't bother to follow the laws that 2 million US real estate agents learned as part of the basic licensing. The onus has been on the platforms for years, but they've all been happy to take real estate ads because its lucrative despite the rules they have to follow. What makes Facebook so special in all of this, when small newspapers and one-person real estate shops have been able to follow these rules for decades?
JamisonM 8y ago
In this case who are the smaller companies you are referring to specifically? If the small companies in question are gaining competitive advantage through non-compliance that makes them viable enterprises then it is good and correct that they should be forced to change their business model and compete with the same rules as everyone else, right? I don't understand what you are saying with this: "Outside of technology, it's common for certain types of services or tools not to be made aware to small-time customers. The technology industry at large and the large tech companies in particular have so far bucked this trend in a way that created a huge amount of value for the world at large.."

google_censors 8y ago

The real problem here is that Facebook is operating in an area where it doesn't have a license and didn't bother to follow the laws that 2 million US real estate agents learned as part of the basic licensing. The onus has been on the platforms for years, but they've all been happy to take real estate ads because its lucrative despite the rules they have to follow. What makes Facebook so special in all of this, when small newspapers and one-person real estate shops have been able to follow these rules for decades?

JamisonM 8y ago

In this case who are the smaller companies you are referring to specifically? If the small companies in question are gaining competitive advantage through non-compliance that makes them viable enterprises then it is good and correct that they should be forced to change their business model and compete with the same rules as everyone else, right? I don't understand what you are saying with this: "Outside of technology, it's common for certain types of services or tools not to be made aware to small-time customers. The technology industry at large and the large tech companies in particular have so far bucked this trend in a way that created a huge amount of value for the world at large.."