5 ms·
> There is a mentality where if a service becomes ubiquitous enough, it should be treated like a public utility. It’s not a particularly valid way of thinking,
by naasking 3y ago
> There is a mentality where if a service becomes ubiquitous enough, it should be treated like a public utility. It’s not a particularly valid way of thinking, but common nonetheless.
You mean if a monopoly is created, it should be regulated like a utility. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me, not sure what's invalid about this way of thinking.
- tenebrisalietum 3y agoThe power company is a monopoly because you can only get power from it. iMessage is not a monopoly because you can get messaging service from multiple other providers, and you are not even limited to using iMessage on an iPhone.
- ImPostingOnHN 3y agoTo continue the analogy, you can get utility service from the gas company or water works. The market in question is chat apps for the iMessage network, like Trillium was (is?) for many networks, not just "messaging".
- pxmpxm 3y agoThat's not how any of that work - monopolies are fine, what gets regulated is anti competitive monopolistic behavior. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act
- naasking 3y agoWe're talking about about what "should" happen, not what allegedly does happen. There's nothing intrinsically problematic with saying any monopoly should be regulated like a utility, which is what the OP had claimed.