4 ms·

For many people, rightly or wrongly, Facebook has become a de facto way to communicate socially and for their business. It has become to big to make the sole de

For many people, rightly or wrongly, Facebook has become a de facto way to communicate socially and for their business. It has become to big to make the sole decisions on who can and cannot be on the platform. It should be treated as a utility, just like phone and internet companies should be.

wvenable 6y ago
This is a poor argument. Facebook provides an HTML form and database for free and lots of people use it so it's a utility? That argument doesn't hold a lot of water. Phone and Internet requires literal physical infrastructure that crosses public and private property, you pay for it, and they are natural monopolies because of that. Facebook is nothing by comparison.
- UShouldBWorking 6y ago
  Not true at all, you Are totally discounting the fact that networks have value. The Bitcoin network is worth billions. The code is easy to fork but no one will use it. Facebook's network is no less valuable (and impossible to reproduce) as a physical network of telephone lines. Facebook's network is EXACTLY the same as the phone company's physical network and should be regulated as such.
- adamcstephens 6y ago
  No, Facebook provides a social network with billions of users and businesses relying on it for communication. Facebook requires literal physical infrastructure that is distributed around the US and the world, with interconnections in between. The two massive data centers they just built near me make that pretty damn clear. Perhaps you may not like the suggestion that I offered, but you’re minimizing what Facebook has become and what it takes to run at that scale.
  - wvenable 6y ago
    You are mischaracterized the situation to make your point. Facebook's infrastructure is all private and not at all unique. The interconnections are the Internet. Anyone can compete with Facebook. You can't create your own telephone poles or run your own railways but you can certainly do everything that Facebook is doing. As for the businesses that rely on it -- they choose to use that platform, for free, knowing exactly what they're getting into. There are thousands of times more businesses that do not rely on Facebook than those that do. Facebook is not some key infrastructure; if it all went away tomorrow it's a minor inconvenience at worst.
    - adamcstephens 6y ago
      Phone lines are privately owned, not publicly. Yes the locality may own the poles, but it may not either. They are leased or granted access to the right of way. Facebook also owns at least some of its own interconnects. It is fine with me if you disagree on principle, but to act like anybody can just create the network effect of Facebook and compete is frankly ridiculous.
      - wvenable 6y ago
        You're splitting hairs about phone lines -- you know what I'm talking about. You talk like Facebook was the first ever social network and didn't start out of dorm room. You talk like there aren't any other social networks right now. Or that there aren't other media companies. What's the end game here? What exactly do you want? The inability to moderate? Nationalized? Broken up? I guarantee you can't come up with a single remedy that isn't ridiculous.
        adamcstephens 6y ago
        The end game for Facebook definitely should include breaking them up. Nationalized, probably not, but they need to be small enough that the federal government can regulate them like every other industry. Facebook’s scale and power are bad for capitalism and democracy. You may find it ridiculous to break them up, but plenty of serious people in this world don’t.

wvenable 6y ago

This is a poor argument. Facebook provides an HTML form and database for free and lots of people use it so it's a utility? That argument doesn't hold a lot of water. Phone and Internet requires literal physical infrastructure that crosses public and private property, you pay for it, and they are natural monopolies because of that. Facebook is nothing by comparison.

UShouldBWorking 6y ago
Not true at all, you Are totally discounting the fact that networks have value. The Bitcoin network is worth billions. The code is easy to fork but no one will use it. Facebook's network is no less valuable (and impossible to reproduce) as a physical network of telephone lines. Facebook's network is EXACTLY the same as the phone company's physical network and should be regulated as such.
adamcstephens 6y ago
No, Facebook provides a social network with billions of users and businesses relying on it for communication. Facebook requires literal physical infrastructure that is distributed around the US and the world, with interconnections in between. The two massive data centers they just built near me make that pretty damn clear. Perhaps you may not like the suggestion that I offered, but you’re minimizing what Facebook has become and what it takes to run at that scale.
- wvenable 6y ago
  You are mischaracterized the situation to make your point. Facebook's infrastructure is all private and not at all unique. The interconnections are the Internet. Anyone can compete with Facebook. You can't create your own telephone poles or run your own railways but you can certainly do everything that Facebook is doing. As for the businesses that rely on it -- they choose to use that platform, for free, knowing exactly what they're getting into. There are thousands of times more businesses that do not rely on Facebook than those that do. Facebook is not some key infrastructure; if it all went away tomorrow it's a minor inconvenience at worst.
  - adamcstephens 6y ago
    Phone lines are privately owned, not publicly. Yes the locality may own the poles, but it may not either. They are leased or granted access to the right of way. Facebook also owns at least some of its own interconnects. It is fine with me if you disagree on principle, but to act like anybody can just create the network effect of Facebook and compete is frankly ridiculous.
    - wvenable 6y ago
      You're splitting hairs about phone lines -- you know what I'm talking about. You talk like Facebook was the first ever social network and didn't start out of dorm room. You talk like there aren't any other social networks right now. Or that there aren't other media companies. What's the end game here? What exactly do you want? The inability to moderate? Nationalized? Broken up? I guarantee you can't come up with a single remedy that isn't ridiculous.
      - adamcstephens 6y ago
        The end game for Facebook definitely should include breaking them up. Nationalized, probably not, but they need to be small enough that the federal government can regulate them like every other industry. Facebook’s scale and power are bad for capitalism and democracy. You may find it ridiculous to break them up, but plenty of serious people in this world don’t.