3 ms·

Ask HN: What does HN think is a solution to the problem of monopolies in tech?

I’ve been noticing that every few weeks (maybe days even) there’s a discussion on why Company should and shouldn’t be doing, what’s typical of them to do since the control a market or a section of it, and possibly their hold/sway on the regulation of the market. There are the recent and obvious examples like Apple’s case with their App Store, and there are the somewhat less obvious ones like Amazon, Microsoft, etc… So what do you think is the main issue here? And what’s the most likely solution(s) to work? Is it a matter of regulation or consumer awareness? Do we need more laissez faire in our capitalism? Curious to see what people think, and why.

markus_zhang 5y ago
1. I think all companies seek monopoly (or oligarchy) because it's the natural way to obtain maximum (and easy) profit. 2. It's the government's responsibility to check on monopoly and break them if needed.
f0e4c2f7 5y ago
The main issue you're describing I think is just how profitable it is to own the platform. In the same way that ads are an unstoppable firehouse of money, so are toll booth charges on your platform. One thing that's frustrating and perhaps part of why it gets posted about so often is that it does not have to be that way and the underlying internet itself is not that way. So if you grew up on the early internet you have some (perhaps rose colored) memories of a better way. Or even looking at models like Wikipedia, (or for some people crypto but I tend to be suspicious of toll booths cropping up in that ecosystem too.) Problems like this can theoretically be regulated away? It's hard for me to imagine. Unsophisticated regulators working on nuanced problems often write policy that unintentially stengthens incumbents. Maybe if you had some really good regulation you could do it that way. The other option, I think the better option. Is for people (some of which I'm sure are on this very website) to build software that does what it says on the tin really well rather than exploiting people (like Wikipedia). The other thing you have to do is come up with a survivable revenue model. Here, you unfortunately have to be an idealist. Wikipedia for example takes in massive amounts of money in donations every year. However, that is a tiny amount of money compared to what they would make....if turned on ads on Wikipedia for one day (thanks for not doing that Jimmy!) Another way would be to not settle for idealism and find a better revenue model than advertising and toll roads. This could really be it's own undertaking to solve the problem. Don't estimate how hard that is though or just how profitable those models are.
dnh44 5y ago
At the current moment I don't believe there is a problem so I would advocate for doing nothing. Maybe later I would change my view but in that case I would like to see a rational and fair approach rather than a vindictive one. For example if 3rd party digital app stores are forced on Apple, then they should be forced on everyone including Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft as well. Additionally they should be forced on Epic too, which has a monopoly on selling cosmetic items in Fortnite.
e-clinton 5y ago
My biggest issue is Amazon controlling the biggest marketplace and also selling products in said marketplace. They should be required to either stop selling their products on there, or be subjected to comprehensive audits (code-base and processes) on a regular basis by the FTC.
lazypenguin 5y ago
In my opinion the biggest reason the major players can stay in their pseudo-monopolistic position is due to regulation in personal data. If we added regulation about data collection and storage I suspect we’d see a change. Observe how in areas with stricter data rules there are more competitors (e.g credit card processors, HIPPAA, etc.)
tonyedgecombe 5y ago
>Do we need more laissez faire in our capitalism? It's hard to see how we could do less given that they are barely regulated right now. >There are the recent and obvious examples like Apple’s case with their App Store I know they get a lot of criticism here but they seem the most benign to me. On the desktop their market share is tiny compared to Microsoft and even for phones Android is on as many phones (in the US, much more so in the rest of the world). Meanwhile Google dominates in search, MS dominates in Office, MS/Amazon have carved up web services between them, Amazon dominates in online consumer sales.
cblconfederate 5y ago
It seems like america is the land of monopoly, do people complain about monopolies in retail?
- codingdave 5y ago
  Yes, absolutely they do. There is a ton of concern about how Amazon is making life difficult for small retail business owners, how a bad review can destroy a small enterprise. There has been concern for a long time when Walmart is the only place to shop in small towns due to unfair business practices. There are many complaints from small manufacturers that Walmart will strongarm them to either just take whatever pricing Walmart will offer, else risk having their work simply counterfeited in China and put on the shelves by someone else. The amount of concern and complaint about retail is quite epic if you dig into it.
Proven 5y ago
Remove existing regulations.
Spooky23 5y ago
Look at postwar history. It’s basically 1960 again. In a few years, these massive companies with huge workforces and are going to be too unwieldy. Some of the big tech companies are sort of an open secret in this area. People make extravagant salaries for jobs that are perhaps less than extravagant in terms of value. Multi-billion dollar companies are little command economies and fail in similar ways. They’ll grow into AT&T style behemoths and fail. I’d venture to guess that Amazon will be first - they hide lots of turds in growth and have massive capitalization requirements. Once that growth slows, boom.
NotAnOtter 5y ago
Something that people seem to always ignore is if Monopolies are actually bad in the tech world. Having cohesion and consistency in tech is a major boon and it's not obvious that the monopoly is overall bad. But that's not the question; if you want to remove them, here is what you do As with everything, if something costs more, people will do less of it. Tax the rich (seriously, 50-80% tax rates for major companies like Amazon and Google), and fund the poor. All our portfolios will shit themselves but we'll get good roads, no homeless, and healthcare. If you started to get into the higher tax rates, we might even see free college and a UBI
errantmind 5y ago
* Stronger regulation of company acquisitions * Weaken IP * Hold executives accountable for company actions (put them in jail if warranted) * Rework the tax system to avoid the offshoring of profits and other tax loopholes All the usual stuff that won't happen with regulatory capture
max_ 5y ago
The problem is not monopolies, the problem is arbitrary use of power[0] [0]: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S1529-209620170000017013/full/html#:~:text=For%20Locke%2C%20'arbitrary%20power',the%20limits%20of%20natural%20law https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S1529-20....
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

markus_zhang 5y ago

1. I think all companies seek monopoly (or oligarchy) because it's the natural way to obtain maximum (and easy) profit. 2. It's the government's responsibility to check on monopoly and break them if needed.

f0e4c2f7 5y ago

The main issue you're describing I think is just how profitable it is to own the platform. In the same way that ads are an unstoppable firehouse of money, so are toll booth charges on your platform. One thing that's frustrating and perhaps part of why it gets posted about so often is that it does not have to be that way and the underlying internet itself is not that way. So if you grew up on the early internet you have some (perhaps rose colored) memories of a better way. Or even looking at models like Wikipedia, (or for some people crypto but I tend to be suspicious of toll booths cropping up in that ecosystem too.) Problems like this can theoretically be regulated away? It's hard for me to imagine. Unsophisticated regulators working on nuanced problems often write policy that unintentially stengthens incumbents. Maybe if you had some really good regulation you could do it that way. The other option, I think the better option. Is for people (some of which I'm sure are on this very website) to build software that does what it says on the tin really well rather than exploiting people (like Wikipedia). The other thing you have to do is come up with a survivable revenue model. Here, you unfortunately have to be an idealist. Wikipedia for example takes in massive amounts of money in donations every year. However, that is a tiny amount of money compared to what they would make....if turned on ads on Wikipedia for one day (thanks for not doing that Jimmy!) Another way would be to not settle for idealism and find a better revenue model than advertising and toll roads. This could really be it's own undertaking to solve the problem. Don't estimate how hard that is though or just how profitable those models are.

dnh44 5y ago

At the current moment I don't believe there is a problem so I would advocate for doing nothing. Maybe later I would change my view but in that case I would like to see a rational and fair approach rather than a vindictive one. For example if 3rd party digital app stores are forced on Apple, then they should be forced on everyone including Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft as well. Additionally they should be forced on Epic too, which has a monopoly on selling cosmetic items in Fortnite.

e-clinton 5y ago

My biggest issue is Amazon controlling the biggest marketplace and also selling products in said marketplace. They should be required to either stop selling their products on there, or be subjected to comprehensive audits (code-base and processes) on a regular basis by the FTC.

lazypenguin 5y ago

In my opinion the biggest reason the major players can stay in their pseudo-monopolistic position is due to regulation in personal data. If we added regulation about data collection and storage I suspect we’d see a change. Observe how in areas with stricter data rules there are more competitors (e.g credit card processors, HIPPAA, etc.)

tonyedgecombe 5y ago

>Do we need more laissez faire in our capitalism? It's hard to see how we could do less given that they are barely regulated right now. >There are the recent and obvious examples like Apple’s case with their App Store I know they get a lot of criticism here but they seem the most benign to me. On the desktop their market share is tiny compared to Microsoft and even for phones Android is on as many phones (in the US, much more so in the rest of the world). Meanwhile Google dominates in search, MS dominates in Office, MS/Amazon have carved up web services between them, Amazon dominates in online consumer sales.

cblconfederate 5y ago

It seems like america is the land of monopoly, do people complain about monopolies in retail?

codingdave 5y ago
Yes, absolutely they do. There is a ton of concern about how Amazon is making life difficult for small retail business owners, how a bad review can destroy a small enterprise. There has been concern for a long time when Walmart is the only place to shop in small towns due to unfair business practices. There are many complaints from small manufacturers that Walmart will strongarm them to either just take whatever pricing Walmart will offer, else risk having their work simply counterfeited in China and put on the shelves by someone else. The amount of concern and complaint about retail is quite epic if you dig into it.

Proven 5y ago

Remove existing regulations.

Spooky23 5y ago

Look at postwar history. It’s basically 1960 again. In a few years, these massive companies with huge workforces and are going to be too unwieldy. Some of the big tech companies are sort of an open secret in this area. People make extravagant salaries for jobs that are perhaps less than extravagant in terms of value. Multi-billion dollar companies are little command economies and fail in similar ways. They’ll grow into AT&T style behemoths and fail. I’d venture to guess that Amazon will be first - they hide lots of turds in growth and have massive capitalization requirements. Once that growth slows, boom.

NotAnOtter 5y ago

Something that people seem to always ignore is if Monopolies are actually bad in the tech world. Having cohesion and consistency in tech is a major boon and it's not obvious that the monopoly is overall bad. But that's not the question; if you want to remove them, here is what you do As with everything, if something costs more, people will do less of it. Tax the rich (seriously, 50-80% tax rates for major companies like Amazon and Google), and fund the poor. All our portfolios will shit themselves but we'll get good roads, no homeless, and healthcare. If you started to get into the higher tax rates, we might even see free college and a UBI

errantmind 5y ago

* Stronger regulation of company acquisitions * Weaken IP * Hold executives accountable for company actions (put them in jail if warranted) * Rework the tax system to avoid the offshoring of profits and other tax loopholes All the usual stuff that won't happen with regulatory capture

max_ 5y ago

The problem is not monopolies, the problem is arbitrary use of power[0] [0]: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S1529-209620170000017013/full/html#:~:text=For%20Locke%2C%20'arbitrary%20power',the%20limits%20of%20natural%20law https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S1529-20....

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]