4 ms·

> paid social networks should be normalized. Or social networks are so critical to our existence that they should be subsidized – and scrutinized – by the gove

by cromka 6y ago

> paid social networks should be normalized. Or social networks are so critical to our existence that they should be subsidized – and scrutinized – by the government. Like any other infrastructure.

strogonoff 6y ago
Subsidized, I strongly disagree. This would mean solidifying social networks’ status as public good. Obvious question “are they?” aside, mandating them to be free (not making money from advertisers or the user) and operate on equal subsidy from the government will have a chilling effect on competition and innovation—why enter a space where there’s really not much to win by being great; where battles are fought in optics and politics rather than in technical superiority? Sure, social networks won’t work for advertisers anymore, but neither they will for the user—they’ll strive to appease the government, since that’s where the money comes from. Inflating user counts and letting troll bot armies run amok will continue coming in handy: dear government, so many people like our network that our servers can’t cope anymore. (And no, social networks won’t even want to try to optimize—they’ll want to use as much compute as possible, securing contracts for their friends in hardware hosting, possibly getting kickbacks in some shape or form from them in return.) Opening API and data interoperation will thus remain against their interests; you might say the government will mandate that, but companies will just deliver poorly working half-solutions doing only as much as necessary to continue getting the subsidy. Scrutinized, on the other hand, sure. A cafe or a restaurant makes money, but is of course still required to pass some controls in order to operate. I think letting the market do its thing and voting with our money will just work once we are the true customers and not the product. Trouble is, big social networks actually prefer status quo where they’re treated as a sort of public-good-adjacent in the eyes of the government and the public. It is much safer to be too large to fail than going paid and having actual competition.

by cromka 6y ago

strogonoff 6y ago

Subsidized, I strongly disagree. This would mean solidifying social networks’ status as public good. Obvious question “are they?” aside, mandating them to be free (not making money from advertisers or the user) and operate on equal subsidy from the government will have a chilling effect on competition and innovation—why enter a space where there’s really not much to win by being great; where battles are fought in optics and politics rather than in technical superiority? Sure, social networks won’t work for advertisers anymore, but neither they will for the user—they’ll strive to appease the government, since that’s where the money comes from. Inflating user counts and letting troll bot armies run amok will continue coming in handy: dear government, so many people like our network that our servers can’t cope anymore. (And no, social networks won’t even want to try to optimize—they’ll want to use as much compute as possible, securing contracts for their friends in hardware hosting, possibly getting kickbacks in some shape or form from them in return.) Opening API and data interoperation will thus remain against their interests; you might say the government will mandate that, but companies will just deliver poorly working half-solutions doing only as much as necessary to continue getting the subsidy. Scrutinized, on the other hand, sure. A cafe or a restaurant makes money, but is of course still required to pass some controls in order to operate. I think letting the market do its thing and voting with our money will just work once we are the true customers and not the product. Trouble is, big social networks actually prefer status quo where they’re treated as a sort of public-good-adjacent in the eyes of the government and the public. It is much safer to be too large to fail than going paid and having actual competition.