3 ms·

I talk about this more in my blog post [0], but I think that the only viable way out of this mess if anti-trust laws ensure that social network companies who ha

by shafyy 6y ago

I talk about this more in my blog post [0], but I think that the only viable way out of this mess if anti-trust laws ensure that social network companies who have more than X users need to use open and decentralized protocols. This would be much easier to achieve than trying to break up companies (not saying we shouldn't break them up). 0: https://canolcer.com/post/social-media-decentralized-by-law/ https://canolcer.com/post/social-media-decentralized-by-law/

Mediterraneo10 6y ago
> social network companies who have more than X users need to use open and decentralized protocols The problem with this is that a corporation can claim that its protocol is open and decentralized, while in practice making it hard for others to implement. Remember how Microsoft managed to make .docx an ISO standard, even though Microsoft Word was the only application that would be able to read and write it 100%? Also, once an open protocol is widespread, embrace–extend–extinguish is possible because the dominant player can claim that while it still supports the protocol as written, the world moves on and it needs to add some new functionality that its peers won't be able to implement in at least the short term.
- shafyy 6y ago
  Yes, good points. I understand that it's not that simple in practice. But at least such laws would lay a foundation and then the details can be discussed better. Anti-trust laws are never black and white, but I would argue that we are better off for them.
psychlops 6y ago
There is some irony in using centralization to break up centralization. Consider the benefits that the governments have in only dealing with a few platforms rather than the headache of a protocol. I don't disagree the anti-trust sentiment, simply that the motivation won't be there at the end of the day.

3 ms·

I talk about this more in my blog post [0], but I think that the only viable way out of this mess if anti-trust laws ensure that social network companies who ha

by shafyy 6y ago

Mediterraneo10 6y ago
> social network companies who have more than X users need to use open and decentralized protocols The problem with this is that a corporation can claim that its protocol is open and decentralized, while in practice making it hard for others to implement. Remember how Microsoft managed to make .docx an ISO standard, even though Microsoft Word was the only application that would be able to read and write it 100%? Also, once an open protocol is widespread, embrace–extend–extinguish is possible because the dominant player can claim that while it still supports the protocol as written, the world moves on and it needs to add some new functionality that its peers won't be able to implement in at least the short term.
- shafyy 6y ago
  Yes, good points. I understand that it's not that simple in practice. But at least such laws would lay a foundation and then the details can be discussed better. Anti-trust laws are never black and white, but I would argue that we are better off for them.
psychlops 6y ago
There is some irony in using centralization to break up centralization. Consider the benefits that the governments have in only dealing with a few platforms rather than the headache of a protocol. I don't disagree the anti-trust sentiment, simply that the motivation won't be there at the end of the day.