5 ms·
> This is an action that could have profoundly disruptive effect If FB is doing anti-competitive things than disruption is needed. It's not meant to be comfor
by mfer 6y ago
> This is an action that could have profoundly disruptive effect
If FB is doing anti-competitive things than disruption is needed. It's not meant to be comfortable.
Companies are really good at learning the playing field and then gaming it for their benefits. Tweaks to laws are often easy to work around. Disruption that stops an illegal monopoly is going to be uncomfortable. Especially at first.
But, it opens the door for the future in ways that aren't options today.
- efwfwef 6y agoBut the product provides real value to real people today, why disrupt this? Also weren't these companies free to not accept an acquisition?
- jzoch 6y agoAndrew Carnegie provided far more real, unquestionable value to people too. It ended up being worth it. The same can be said for Leland Stanford or most other monopolies. They didn't become monopolies by not providing value.
- will_pseudonym 6y ago> Andrew Carnegie provided far more real, unquestionable value to people too. It ended up being worth it. The same can be said for Leland Stanford or most other monopolies. They didn't become monopolies by not providing value. Absolutely. The same could also be said of the closest parallel of Facebook in history, the Bell System. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System
- hef19898 6y agoBecause move fast and brake things? Disruption good? No, seriously, modern tech companies are an anti-trust challenge that was not truely forseen in existing anti-trust laws. That governments are now trying to find answers is a good thing.
- TheRealNGenius 6y ago*then