5 ms·

You live in a town with no fresh water, and the only drinks available are sold by the local store. This store does not sell bottled water, wine, orange juice, m

by MikeUt 6y ago

You live in a town with no fresh water, and the only drinks available are sold by the local store. This store does not sell bottled water, wine, orange juice, milk, or tea. The only drinks it sells are Coca-Cola and Pepsi. But if you don't like Coca-Cola, just buy Pepsi - how silly it would be to complain of monopoly when you still have a choice!

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
Who is Twitter in your analogy? The store? Then your analogy is flawed because there are other big stores that sell basically the same stuff and even some small shops. Not a monopoly. If all of them choose not to sell that product that doesn't mean anything. They don't have any obligation to carry whatever you want. Man, people are being absurd about this whole thing.
- MikeUt 6y ago
  The analogy is flawed. Saying there are no monopoly issues as long as there are at least two competitors is even more flawed. If major cinema chains (Twitter, Facebook..) refuse to show a movie, but you can still rent the back of Moe's bar (and thousands bars like it) and use their second-hand projector (an analogy for the small audience of alternative platforms). How successful will such movies be? Should we be concerned that the cinema chains can decide what sort of movies can be made or have any sort of impact?
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
    > The analogy is flawed. Saying there are no monopoly issues as long as there are at least two competitors is even more flawed. There are significantly more than two companies that allow mass communication over the internet. In fact, there are a significant number of perfectly free and open ways to communicate over the internet. Why is Twitter special? > If major cinema chains (Twitter, Facebook..) refuse to show a movie, but you can still rent the back of Moe's bar (and thousands bars like it) and use their second-hand projector (an analogy for the small audience of alternative platforms). How successful will such movies be? Sorta my point, because that happens all the time. No one goes around saying theater chains are monopolies and need to show every movie anyone deigns to have projected on a screen. > Should we be concerned that the cinema chains can decide what sort of movies can be made or have any sort of impact? Maybe, but that isn't legal standing for doing anything. If you don't like it, boycott theaters, tell your friends not to go to them, promote alternatives that deliver what you want. Oh, but then the market might disagree with you and keep going to the theaters anyway. Well tough. You're not entitled to force people to care. Alternatively, push for legislation around online communication platforms and how they are allowed to determine who can and cannot speak on them. But then don't be surprised when those rules apply to your mailing list too.
edmundsauto 6y ago
To extend the analogy so it's more accurate: or you could go to the local stream and drink some water (host your own speech).
- Strom 6y ago
  To add some spice from the real world, you may find that the local stream has run dry: Farmers rely on access to groundwater for the cultivation of their crops. but since Coca-Cola's arrival, they have been confronted with a serious decline in water levels. [...] documents from the government's water ministry show that water levels remained stable from 1995 until 2000, when the Coca-Cola plant became operational. Water levels then dropped by almost 10 metres over the following five years. https://waronwant.org/news-analysis/coca-cola-drinking-world-dry https://waronwant.org/news-analysis/coca-cola-drinking-world... The company was blamed for depleting the local supply of water even in communities where it did not have operations https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/05/31/how-coca-cola-came-to-terms-with-its-own-water-crisis/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/05/31/h...
mr_toad 6y ago
> You live in a town with no fresh water, and the only drinks available are sold by the local store. Sounds like the plot of Idiocracy.

by MikeUt 6y ago

AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago

Who is Twitter in your analogy? The store? Then your analogy is flawed because there are other big stores that sell basically the same stuff and even some small shops. Not a monopoly. If all of them choose not to sell that product that doesn't mean anything. They don't have any obligation to carry whatever you want. Man, people are being absurd about this whole thing.

MikeUt 6y ago
The analogy is flawed. Saying there are no monopoly issues as long as there are at least two competitors is even more flawed. If major cinema chains (Twitter, Facebook..) refuse to show a movie, but you can still rent the back of Moe's bar (and thousands bars like it) and use their second-hand projector (an analogy for the small audience of alternative platforms). How successful will such movies be? Should we be concerned that the cinema chains can decide what sort of movies can be made or have any sort of impact?
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  > The analogy is flawed. Saying there are no monopoly issues as long as there are at least two competitors is even more flawed. There are significantly more than two companies that allow mass communication over the internet. In fact, there are a significant number of perfectly free and open ways to communicate over the internet. Why is Twitter special? > If major cinema chains (Twitter, Facebook..) refuse to show a movie, but you can still rent the back of Moe's bar (and thousands bars like it) and use their second-hand projector (an analogy for the small audience of alternative platforms). How successful will such movies be? Sorta my point, because that happens all the time. No one goes around saying theater chains are monopolies and need to show every movie anyone deigns to have projected on a screen. > Should we be concerned that the cinema chains can decide what sort of movies can be made or have any sort of impact? Maybe, but that isn't legal standing for doing anything. If you don't like it, boycott theaters, tell your friends not to go to them, promote alternatives that deliver what you want. Oh, but then the market might disagree with you and keep going to the theaters anyway. Well tough. You're not entitled to force people to care. Alternatively, push for legislation around online communication platforms and how they are allowed to determine who can and cannot speak on them. But then don't be surprised when those rules apply to your mailing list too.

edmundsauto 6y ago

To extend the analogy so it's more accurate: or you could go to the local stream and drink some water (host your own speech).

Strom 6y ago
To add some spice from the real world, you may find that the local stream has run dry: Farmers rely on access to groundwater for the cultivation of their crops. but since Coca-Cola's arrival, they have been confronted with a serious decline in water levels. [...] documents from the government's water ministry show that water levels remained stable from 1995 until 2000, when the Coca-Cola plant became operational. Water levels then dropped by almost 10 metres over the following five years. https://waronwant.org/news-analysis/coca-cola-drinking-world-dry https://waronwant.org/news-analysis/coca-cola-drinking-world... The company was blamed for depleting the local supply of water even in communities where it did not have operations https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/05/31/how-coca-cola-came-to-terms-with-its-own-water-crisis/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/05/31/h...

mr_toad 6y ago

> You live in a town with no fresh water, and the only drinks available are sold by the local store. Sounds like the plot of Idiocracy.