5 ms·

What’s their monopoly on? Serious question. Too many people like using fb so we break them up? lolwut. Is fb actively stifling competition? Is there a market f

What’s their monopoly on? Serious question. Too many people like using fb so we break them up? lolwut. Is fb actively stifling competition? Is there a market failure?

anoncake 8y ago
> Serious question. I dont believe you. You know exactly what is Facebooks monopoly.
- tracer4201 8y ago
  Your argument is that you’re 100% correct and “you don’t believe” others could have a different opinion. No offense but why are you on this forum? Do you seriously expect others to conform to your opinions?
  - anoncake 8y ago
    The arguments why Facebook is a monopoly are well-known. Feel free to disagree with them, but Im not going to waste my time explaining things to you that surely you already know.
    - headsoup 8y ago
      One example of trolling is when someone posts into a thread a 'truth' while calling others liars, then not providing any evidence of that 'truth' when asked. So either you are trolling, or you'll be so kind as to actually post the arguments for why Facebook is a monopoly so we can ensure we're discussing under a shared context.
- chillacy 8y ago
  That sort of attitude goes against the spirit of discussion imo. Makes for very uninteresting reading :(
ktjfi 8y ago
Having a monopoly is not illegal. Using your monopoly to do things you can't do if you're not a monopoly can be illegal depending on the circumstances.
- int_19h 8y ago
  And Warren's proposal aims to change exactly that.
- baddox 8y ago
  This is probably the biggest myth about US antitrust law. It seems to be almost universally believed, but is very clearly false. See, for instance, what happened to Alcoa. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Alcoa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Alcoa
mirimir 8y ago
> What’s their monopoly on? Serious question. Too many people like using fb so we break them up? lolwut. Yes, basically. Or at least, they have a partial monopoly on social media. > Is fb actively stifling competition? They've been buying competitors. That's classic monopolistic behavior to stifle competition. > Is there a market failure? Pretty damn close. Even Google couldn't moose its way in.
- booleandilemma 8y ago
  Google doesn’t like to actively compete though. It’s always been very quick to discontinue products, shrug its shoulders, and say “nevermind”. It would be interesting to see Google release some sort of decentralized open source social networking software connected to Google Play. Something like Android, but for social networks. I could see FB being bothered by that.
- wvenable 8y ago
  I'm pretty sure "partial monopoly" is an oxymoron.
  - mirimir 8y ago
    https://scholar.google.de/scholar?hl=de&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=partial+monopoly&btnG= https://scholar.google.de/scholar?hl=de&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=parti...
- chillacy 8y ago
  Snapchat? TikTok? Discord? Reddit? Facebook has a monopoly on Facebook.
  - mirimir 8y ago
    Sure, they have competitors. But there are no close equivalents with substantial market power.
as300 8y ago
Their monopoly is on discourse and dissemination of information. I'm going to sound a bit paternalistic and anti-capitalist here, because I am. Facebook is no longer just a company, it's an institution that should definitely be regulated. It enables the rapid dissemination of societally-impactful information that may or may not be true. There was plenty of fake information on facebook around the 2016 election that influenced uneducated/uncritical/unintelligent voters' opinions of the candidates. Having content curation guidelines that are informed by non-facebook entities almost certainly is needed, imo.
- nopriorarrests 8y ago
  > It enables the rapid dissemination of societally-impactful information that may or may not be true. This is the exact reason why Russia blocked (or at least tried to) block Telegram, and why Facebook is banned in China.
- wvenable 8y ago
  They own the majority means of discourse and dissemination of information? Newpapers? Television networks? Come on. That's not even close to true.
  - will_brown 8y ago
    Those other things you list...newspapers, television, networks...they all have a Facebook page and distribute their content through FB. These traditional forms of media are scrambling for likes/comments just as much as the next influencer.
    - wvenable 8y ago
      No business would fail if it didn't have a Facebook page. It's not necessary. Now compare that with Google -- most businesses need to be listed on Google or they will lose significant amount of business. Facebook is nothing by comparison. Being popular doesn't make something a monopoly.
whyenot 8y ago
> Is fb actively stifling competition? Is there a market failure? They bought two of their competitors and copied the features of a third. None of that may meet the definition of "stifling competition," but it's a strategy that did neutralize potential competitors. With 29% of the world's population logging in to FB at least once a month (2.23 bn "monthly active users" / 7.7 bn), and receiving algorithmically target messages from Facebook and its advertisers, there is tremendous potential for abuse.
killjoywashere 8y ago
> Is fb actively stifling competition? If they're suppressing the debate, then yes, they are. When it comes to political speech, the democratic governance process is definitely a competitor. > Is there a market failure? As long as Facebook is the go-to platform for political advertising and they use their position as the market to influence market positions, then yes, there is a failure. Imagine if the NYSE chairman picked the stock winners every day, not because he's a prophet, but because he literally decided, in advance, who's going to get to move shares today.

What’s their monopoly on? Serious question. Too many people like using fb so we break them up? lolwut. Is fb actively stifling competition? Is there a market failure?

anoncake 8y ago

> Serious question. I dont believe you. You know exactly what is Facebooks monopoly.

tracer4201 8y ago
Your argument is that you’re 100% correct and “you don’t believe” others could have a different opinion. No offense but why are you on this forum? Do you seriously expect others to conform to your opinions?
- anoncake 8y ago
  The arguments why Facebook is a monopoly are well-known. Feel free to disagree with them, but Im not going to waste my time explaining things to you that surely you already know.
  - headsoup 8y ago
    One example of trolling is when someone posts into a thread a 'truth' while calling others liars, then not providing any evidence of that 'truth' when asked. So either you are trolling, or you'll be so kind as to actually post the arguments for why Facebook is a monopoly so we can ensure we're discussing under a shared context.
chillacy 8y ago
That sort of attitude goes against the spirit of discussion imo. Makes for very uninteresting reading :(

ktjfi 8y ago

Having a monopoly is not illegal. Using your monopoly to do things you can't do if you're not a monopoly can be illegal depending on the circumstances.

int_19h 8y ago
And Warren's proposal aims to change exactly that.
baddox 8y ago
This is probably the biggest myth about US antitrust law. It seems to be almost universally believed, but is very clearly false. See, for instance, what happened to Alcoa. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Alcoa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Alcoa

mirimir 8y ago

> What’s their monopoly on? Serious question. Too many people like using fb so we break them up? lolwut. Yes, basically. Or at least, they have a partial monopoly on social media. > Is fb actively stifling competition? They've been buying competitors. That's classic monopolistic behavior to stifle competition. > Is there a market failure? Pretty damn close. Even Google couldn't moose its way in.

booleandilemma 8y ago
Google doesn’t like to actively compete though. It’s always been very quick to discontinue products, shrug its shoulders, and say “nevermind”. It would be interesting to see Google release some sort of decentralized open source social networking software connected to Google Play. Something like Android, but for social networks. I could see FB being bothered by that.
wvenable 8y ago
I'm pretty sure "partial monopoly" is an oxymoron.
- mirimir 8y ago
  https://scholar.google.de/scholar?hl=de&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=partial+monopoly&btnG= https://scholar.google.de/scholar?hl=de&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=parti...
chillacy 8y ago
Snapchat? TikTok? Discord? Reddit? Facebook has a monopoly on Facebook.
- mirimir 8y ago
  Sure, they have competitors. But there are no close equivalents with substantial market power.

as300 8y ago

Their monopoly is on discourse and dissemination of information. I'm going to sound a bit paternalistic and anti-capitalist here, because I am. Facebook is no longer just a company, it's an institution that should definitely be regulated. It enables the rapid dissemination of societally-impactful information that may or may not be true. There was plenty of fake information on facebook around the 2016 election that influenced uneducated/uncritical/unintelligent voters' opinions of the candidates. Having content curation guidelines that are informed by non-facebook entities almost certainly is needed, imo.

nopriorarrests 8y ago
> It enables the rapid dissemination of societally-impactful information that may or may not be true. This is the exact reason why Russia blocked (or at least tried to) block Telegram, and why Facebook is banned in China.
wvenable 8y ago
They own the majority means of discourse and dissemination of information? Newpapers? Television networks? Come on. That's not even close to true.
- will_brown 8y ago
  Those other things you list...newspapers, television, networks...they all have a Facebook page and distribute their content through FB. These traditional forms of media are scrambling for likes/comments just as much as the next influencer.
  - wvenable 8y ago
    No business would fail if it didn't have a Facebook page. It's not necessary. Now compare that with Google -- most businesses need to be listed on Google or they will lose significant amount of business. Facebook is nothing by comparison. Being popular doesn't make something a monopoly.

whyenot 8y ago

> Is fb actively stifling competition? Is there a market failure? They bought two of their competitors and copied the features of a third. None of that may meet the definition of "stifling competition," but it's a strategy that did neutralize potential competitors. With 29% of the world's population logging in to FB at least once a month (2.23 bn "monthly active users" / 7.7 bn), and receiving algorithmically target messages from Facebook and its advertisers, there is tremendous potential for abuse.

killjoywashere 8y ago

> Is fb actively stifling competition? If they're suppressing the debate, then yes, they are. When it comes to political speech, the democratic governance process is definitely a competitor. > Is there a market failure? As long as Facebook is the go-to platform for political advertising and they use their position as the market to influence market positions, then yes, there is a failure. Imagine if the NYSE chairman picked the stock winners every day, not because he's a prophet, but because he literally decided, in advance, who's going to get to move shares today.