3 ms·
The article advocates for this, calling it “competitive compatibility,” but noting “it’s not enough to legalize competitive compatibility, since the platforms h
by sjy 6y ago
The article advocates for this, calling it “competitive compatibility,” but noting “it’s not enough to legalize competitive compatibility, since the platforms have such an advantage in technical resources that serious competitors’ attempts to interoperate face enormous engineering challenges.”
- crazygringo 6y agoInteresting, but I don't buy it. The existence of "youtube-dl" and scraping tools shows that, actually, it's the competitors who usually win. The fact is, if a service works for users at all, it's never going to be terribly difficult to scrape. That's the whole point of why it's ultimately far more beneficial for users and competitors.
- vharuck 6y agoIt's almost the inverse of websites being too powerful to compete with. The people scraping data are too small to bother with. It might be a problem if it becomes too widespread because of the legislation. The music industry survived Napster and file sharing because it had other revenue paths. But I guess if Facebook fell to an alternative way to interact which Facebook couldn't afford to stop, then that'd just be the free market at work.