4 ms·

> The only way to tackle this is to put leadership in prison. This is not the kind of democracy I want to live in. I'd much, much rather see a grassroots move

> The only way to tackle this is to put leadership in prison. This is not the kind of democracy I want to live in. I'd much, much rather see a grassroots movement pushing to once again return to the marketplace of ideas, where for each "category" you have a host of apps competing against each other, not just one or two. As a society, we should learn to hone the oscillatory nature of the complex system that is a tech niche: a niche forms => many apps populate the space => one app begins dominating => it consumes the rest (e.g: buy outs) => eventually the "one" app is replaced by a new market of apps. We're failing on the last step and I'd like to get there without using the government's monopoly on violence.

ethbr1 3y ago
> rather see a grassroots movement pushing to once again return to the marketplace of ideas, where for each "category" you have a host of apps competing against each other, not just one or two. IMHO, what we need to return to is "free (provider choice) and competitive (provider price) access to the market." E.g. what the internet and web originally were, which begat the current tech giants (including the modern versions of Microsoft and Apple) by allowing them to circumvent existing gatekeepers. Which, critically, means removing the requirement to pay a tithe of your success (or attempt) to anyone. Because that's where big tech is currently financially entrenched -- to be on our platforms (i.e. any used platform), you have to pay us. Which leads to tails-you-lose-heads-I-win scenarios, which strategically block any future challenger from emerging, because they're sacrificing so much of their profit to existing gatekeepers. The EU got their regulatory targets correct -- either you can be a gatekeeper, controlling access to a large number of users, and abide by heavy limitations on your ability to tax companies that go through you; or you can not be in a gatekeeper position and compete fully. But you don't get to be a gatekeeper and do anything you want.

ethbr1 3y ago

> rather see a grassroots movement pushing to once again return to the marketplace of ideas, where for each "category" you have a host of apps competing against each other, not just one or two. IMHO, what we need to return to is "free (provider choice) and competitive (provider price) access to the market." E.g. what the internet and web originally were, which begat the current tech giants (including the modern versions of Microsoft and Apple) by allowing them to circumvent existing gatekeepers. Which, critically, means removing the requirement to pay a tithe of your success (or attempt) to anyone. Because that's where big tech is currently financially entrenched -- to be on our platforms (i.e. any used platform), you have to pay us. Which leads to tails-you-lose-heads-I-win scenarios, which strategically block any future challenger from emerging, because they're sacrificing so much of their profit to existing gatekeepers. The EU got their regulatory targets correct -- either you can be a gatekeeper, controlling access to a large number of users, and abide by heavy limitations on your ability to tax companies that go through you; or you can not be in a gatekeeper position and compete fully. But you don't get to be a gatekeeper and do anything you want.