3 ms·
There are not enough similarities between protocols and businesses for that analogy to work or have any explanatory value.
by jdbernard 5y ago
There are not enough similarities between protocols and businesses for that analogy to work or have any explanatory value.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Rury 5y agoExcept that there is: >a dominant protocol of a certain domain where there's no other widely used alternative: TCP/IP >a dominant business of a certain industry where there's no other widely used alternative: monopoly I think you might be missing the point I'm making. If you carefully re-read what I wrote, I never said monopolies came without bad properties or were immune to being bad. I also never said protocols were in fact the same things as businesses. I merely pointed out a good tradeoff people aren't acknowledging: Monopolies can provide a common, standard of something which can make certain things easier (just like TCP/IP does). And that's not the same as saying: "TCP/IP comes without problems..."; "monopolies come without problems..."; "TCP/IP is a monopoly..."