4 ms·

A better approach than frozen mini-nets is just to require any company above a certain number of users to open its protocol like email. You could then get your

by SiVal 6y ago

A better approach than frozen mini-nets is just to require any company above a certain number of users to open its protocol like email. You could then get your access to the system via any ISP, and you would be the one who decided what opinions were allowed to reach you by who you subscribed to without the mandatory "safety service" provided by a single party. They could still offer that service as an option but wouldn't be able to mandate it.

rorykoehler 6y ago
Huge fan of making utilities out of the most successful services as a default modus operandi.
- SiVal 6y ago
  Yes, and it should apply to all online systems as they grow into the millions of users, because not surprisingly, network effects are pervasive on the network. So not just communications but commerce such as Amazon should be forced to transition (in stages) or stop growing. They could do whatever they wanted with their customers (pricing, who and how to serve, terms of service, etc.) when they were small enough that users could in practice leave them for a competitor just as easily as they could cut off service. But if they allowed themselves to grow to into the millions of users, they would have to gradually transition to purely uninvolved, invisible infrastructure, like an underground water pipe. Their users would deal with smaller middlemen instead of the background infrastructure provider. The infrastructure provider would have no way to impose terms of service or philosophical opinions or pricing controls or whatever, which only the middlemen would be allowed, and if the middlemen all conspire, the infrastructure provider wouldn't be able to deny service to a new middleman who offered an alternative. Basically, the small players deal freely with small players, and the biggest players, instead of gaining leverage, would have to serve them more and control or compete less (or remain small and retain the full freedom of a small player).
dane-pgp 6y ago
Interestingly, the GDPR comes close to the requirement you suggest. It defines a "right to data portability"[0] saying that users "shall have the right to have [their] personal data transmitted directly from one controller to another, where technically feasible." If this were interpreted by a court or regulator (perhaps as part of an EU anti-trust investigation) as a requirement to have new data automatically exported on an on-going basis, then that is very similar to requiring effectively federation between big services. [0] https://gdpr-info.eu/art-20-gdpr/ https://gdpr-info.eu/art-20-gdpr/

by SiVal 6y ago

rorykoehler 6y ago

Huge fan of making utilities out of the most successful services as a default modus operandi.

SiVal 6y ago
Yes, and it should apply to all online systems as they grow into the millions of users, because not surprisingly, network effects are pervasive on the network. So not just communications but commerce such as Amazon should be forced to transition (in stages) or stop growing. They could do whatever they wanted with their customers (pricing, who and how to serve, terms of service, etc.) when they were small enough that users could in practice leave them for a competitor just as easily as they could cut off service. But if they allowed themselves to grow to into the millions of users, they would have to gradually transition to purely uninvolved, invisible infrastructure, like an underground water pipe. Their users would deal with smaller middlemen instead of the background infrastructure provider. The infrastructure provider would have no way to impose terms of service or philosophical opinions or pricing controls or whatever, which only the middlemen would be allowed, and if the middlemen all conspire, the infrastructure provider wouldn't be able to deny service to a new middleman who offered an alternative. Basically, the small players deal freely with small players, and the biggest players, instead of gaining leverage, would have to serve them more and control or compete less (or remain small and retain the full freedom of a small player).

dane-pgp 6y ago

Interestingly, the GDPR comes close to the requirement you suggest. It defines a "right to data portability"[0] saying that users "shall have the right to have [their] personal data transmitted directly from one controller to another, where technically feasible." If this were interpreted by a court or regulator (perhaps as part of an EU anti-trust investigation) as a requirement to have new data automatically exported on an on-going basis, then that is very similar to requiring effectively federation between big services. [0] https://gdpr-info.eu/art-20-gdpr/ https://gdpr-info.eu/art-20-gdpr/