6 ms·

This is a serious problem. Internet marketplaces are so big now that its really hard to even have a business without them at all. I think that after a certain

by cptaj 3y ago

This is a serious problem. Internet marketplaces are so big now that its really hard to even have a business without them at all. I think that after a certain size, these marketplaces should be regulated to insure due process between the parties. That way the whims of the marketplace owner can't destroy thousands of prosperous businesses at the push of a button. We have similar regulations for utilities. The power company can't kick you out on a whim. I think the same rationale applies here.

sofixa 3y ago
That's exactly the thinking that led to the Digital Markets Act in the EU. Those marketplaces are effective monopolies or oligopolies in their space, so access to them needs to be regulated to ensure a level playing field.
- bemusedthrow75 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - sjwhevvvvvsj 3y ago
    Ahh yes, another premature declaration of success by the EU, who haven’t properly enforced ePrivacy, GDPR, or a host of other regulations. The EU is all talk and posturing, you can write any law you want but the tech companies already figured out compliance is optional.
    - sofixa 3y ago
      Apple have already started using USB-C in iPhones, have already announced how they'll allow apps to be installed on iPhones without their App Store. Google have stopped shoving Google Maps on Search results. Many companies, including Google, Facebook and similar, have changed how they do things because of the GDPR, and have been fined for not complying.
      - sjwhevvvvvsj 3y ago
        The FTCs fine on Facebook from a few years ago exceeds the combined value of all GDPR fines levied to date. The Irish government fills its coffers with the largesse of tech companies that are headquartered there specifically to dodge taxes and regulation. Likewise, while GDPR has some initial changes in privacy after many months of inaction tracking levels started to rebound because everybody figured out nobody was going to enforce it.
        bemusedthrow75 3y ago
        > The FTCs fine on Facebook from a few years ago exceeds the combined value of all GDPR fines levied to date. This isn't anywhere near as significant a point as you think.
        sjwhevvvvvsj 3y ago
        The fun thing about hacker news is that for all you know I may be directly involved in these issues and speak from direct first-hand, but highly confidential, knowledge. Or I’m just some moron, posting opinions with absolutely no basis in fact. Only I can be sure!
        bemusedthrow75 3y ago
        And yet either way it still would not, IMO, be as significant a point as you think.
        sjwhevvvvvsj 3y ago
        Ah, but you are be very wrong.
        smoldesu 3y ago
        Given that we have to take you on your merits as an entirely anonymous source, I think they're actually very right.
    - bemusedthrow75 3y ago
      I don't see where I declared success. And I'm not even in the EU.
15457345234 3y ago
I've argued this before; these companies have taken on a utility role and need utility-type regulation, i.e. an obligation to provide service fairly and universally, an ombudsman, viable oversight, physical presence, a local call center to provide local employment and to give back to the community, etc. This situation where 100% of the taxi and food delivery profit from every small town in the world gets siphoned off back to a single office in California just isn't viable. Even from a within-US perspective it isn't viable.
carlosjobim 3y ago
[flagged]
- bemusedthrow75 3y ago
  [flagged]
- Sabinus 3y ago
  Look we all know governments can do some crazy things and regulatory capture is awful, but you libertarian types really have some strange ideas about regulation.
  - carlosjobim 3y ago
    Half of this forum would be out of a job if it wasn't for Google, but still they down vote my comment and demand government regulation. They have no clue what they're in for. While Google has it flaws – big flaws – at least for the most they give anybody a chance to compete in the results ranking. A government regulated search engine or web portal won't be anything like that.
    - troupo 3y ago
      > Half of this forum would be out of a job if it wasn't for Google Hahaha wat. > still they down vote my comment and demand government regulation. They have no clue what they're in for. Oh, we do have a clue. We have close to two centuries [1] of data to draw from. Corporations and big companies will always go for the worst possible things and are only reigned in when the government steps in. Without fail. > at least for the most they give anybody a chance to compete in the results ranking. No, they don't. And they haven't done this for a very long time now. [1] Well, more. Government regulations are as old as governments, but let's take the last two centuries as something resembling more modern capitalism.
      - carlosjobim 3y ago
        > No, they don't. And they haven't done this for a very long time now. They do. I've launched several projects in the past years from nothing, with no backlinks, that are ranking high on Google and making good money. Just by adding the pages to their index in the box they provide. That's just the truth, no matter how strongly you feel for your ideology.
AnthonyMouse 3y ago
> I think that after a certain size, these marketplaces should be regulated to insure due process between the parties. The solution is not for them to be big and regulated, it's for them not to be so big. The main thing that would help here is to inhibit vertical integration. For example, suppose people had a legal right to pricing information. Companies like Amazon and eBay would be encouraged to provide an API and have no right to stop anyone from scraping their site for anything it doesn't provide. Now anyone can make a product search engine that will show you results from any site. You're not stuck with Amazon's gawdawful search. And since anyone can do this, it's easy to enter the market and none of them will have dominance. Conversely, if you want to start a new retailer, or sell your own products directly from your own site, you just submit your site for indexing to the popular product search engines and customers appear. But none of the search engines can destroy you because there are dozens of them and the biggest one is only 15% of the market. We need more competition. The target of the rules should be to lower barriers to entry.

by cptaj 3y ago

sofixa 3y ago

That's exactly the thinking that led to the Digital Markets Act in the EU. Those marketplaces are effective monopolies or oligopolies in their space, so access to them needs to be regulated to ensure a level playing field.

bemusedthrow75 3y ago
[flagged]
- sjwhevvvvvsj 3y ago
  Ahh yes, another premature declaration of success by the EU, who haven’t properly enforced ePrivacy, GDPR, or a host of other regulations. The EU is all talk and posturing, you can write any law you want but the tech companies already figured out compliance is optional.
  - sofixa 3y ago
    Apple have already started using USB-C in iPhones, have already announced how they'll allow apps to be installed on iPhones without their App Store. Google have stopped shoving Google Maps on Search results. Many companies, including Google, Facebook and similar, have changed how they do things because of the GDPR, and have been fined for not complying.
    - sjwhevvvvvsj 3y ago
      The FTCs fine on Facebook from a few years ago exceeds the combined value of all GDPR fines levied to date. The Irish government fills its coffers with the largesse of tech companies that are headquartered there specifically to dodge taxes and regulation. Likewise, while GDPR has some initial changes in privacy after many months of inaction tracking levels started to rebound because everybody figured out nobody was going to enforce it.
      - bemusedthrow75 3y ago
        > The FTCs fine on Facebook from a few years ago exceeds the combined value of all GDPR fines levied to date. This isn't anywhere near as significant a point as you think.
        sjwhevvvvvsj 3y ago
        The fun thing about hacker news is that for all you know I may be directly involved in these issues and speak from direct first-hand, but highly confidential, knowledge. Or I’m just some moron, posting opinions with absolutely no basis in fact. Only I can be sure!
        bemusedthrow75 3y ago
        And yet either way it still would not, IMO, be as significant a point as you think.
        sjwhevvvvvsj 3y ago
        Ah, but you are be very wrong.
        smoldesu 3y ago
        Given that we have to take you on your merits as an entirely anonymous source, I think they're actually very right.
  - bemusedthrow75 3y ago
    I don't see where I declared success. And I'm not even in the EU.

15457345234 3y ago

I've argued this before; these companies have taken on a utility role and need utility-type regulation, i.e. an obligation to provide service fairly and universally, an ombudsman, viable oversight, physical presence, a local call center to provide local employment and to give back to the community, etc. This situation where 100% of the taxi and food delivery profit from every small town in the world gets siphoned off back to a single office in California just isn't viable. Even from a within-US perspective it isn't viable.

carlosjobim 3y ago

[flagged]

bemusedthrow75 3y ago
[flagged]
Sabinus 3y ago
Look we all know governments can do some crazy things and regulatory capture is awful, but you libertarian types really have some strange ideas about regulation.
- carlosjobim 3y ago
  Half of this forum would be out of a job if it wasn't for Google, but still they down vote my comment and demand government regulation. They have no clue what they're in for. While Google has it flaws – big flaws – at least for the most they give anybody a chance to compete in the results ranking. A government regulated search engine or web portal won't be anything like that.
  - troupo 3y ago
    > Half of this forum would be out of a job if it wasn't for Google Hahaha wat. > still they down vote my comment and demand government regulation. They have no clue what they're in for. Oh, we do have a clue. We have close to two centuries [1] of data to draw from. Corporations and big companies will always go for the worst possible things and are only reigned in when the government steps in. Without fail. > at least for the most they give anybody a chance to compete in the results ranking. No, they don't. And they haven't done this for a very long time now. [1] Well, more. Government regulations are as old as governments, but let's take the last two centuries as something resembling more modern capitalism.
    - carlosjobim 3y ago
      > No, they don't. And they haven't done this for a very long time now. They do. I've launched several projects in the past years from nothing, with no backlinks, that are ranking high on Google and making good money. Just by adding the pages to their index in the box they provide. That's just the truth, no matter how strongly you feel for your ideology.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

> I think that after a certain size, these marketplaces should be regulated to insure due process between the parties. The solution is not for them to be big and regulated, it's for them not to be so big. The main thing that would help here is to inhibit vertical integration. For example, suppose people had a legal right to pricing information. Companies like Amazon and eBay would be encouraged to provide an API and have no right to stop anyone from scraping their site for anything it doesn't provide. Now anyone can make a product search engine that will show you results from any site. You're not stuck with Amazon's gawdawful search. And since anyone can do this, it's easy to enter the market and none of them will have dominance. Conversely, if you want to start a new retailer, or sell your own products directly from your own site, you just submit your site for indexing to the popular product search engines and customers appear. But none of the search engines can destroy you because there are dozens of them and the biggest one is only 15% of the market. We need more competition. The target of the rules should be to lower barriers to entry.