A superficial analysis would say that there is a balance between the two dynamics of "Don't put all your eggs in one basket" and "A chain is only as strong as i

A superficial analysis would say that there is a balance between the two dynamics of "Don't put all your eggs in one basket" and "A chain is only as strong as its weakest link". A slightly deeper analysis would ask first "What are the incentive structures in a system where people can seamlessly migrate from one provider to another?". We have already seen that Facebook, as a monopolistic provider, is too big to fail, and it can keep paying the meagre fines for its non-compliance with the rules, while lobbying and threatening[0] and exploiting its election-influencing power to ensure the regulations don't significantly limit its assault on users' privacy. It's not hard to imagine that if 20 different companies were competing for users, they might act in ways that better protect users' privacy. In fact the competitive pressure on them would be twofold, since not only could users move to different providers, but users could also refuse to connect to a friend on a network whose policies they do not trust. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/sep/22/facebook-says-it-may-quit-europe-over-ban-on-sharing-data-with-us https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/sep/22/facebook-...