Break up Facebook

[justoffal]

Yeah, I've brought that up many times. Nothing is stopping a few conservative techie nerds from creating their own social media platform for the right, or better yet, for everyone without engaging in bias of any kind and give FB and Twitter a run for their money.

It's interesting that "conservatives" brag that they're the ones who are for capitalism, and they make the best businessmen, yet some of the biggest companies to ever exist are the constant targets of their ire.You'd figure with all that business acumen they possess they'd create a company that would blow Google, Twitter, Amazon, Facebook, etc. out of the water

You don't need politics to understand the potential damage of a Monopoly or a near Monopoly. The most dangerous men in world History were the Robber Barons of the Gilded age.

Jo

Start your own competitor.

I hear what you're saying and I agree.
That however does not alleviate the pressure from the already dominant Giants.
They will be broken up...and it will be a bipartisan decision not based on jealousy but based on the already numerous
Crimes that all of them have committed.

Jo

They are not monopolies because they are not essential services, and there are competitors. While a lot of people do use more than one social media platform there are people who have stopped using Facebook to use Instagram. Or stopped using Instagram to use Snapchat. Facebook and Twitter are not services unto themselves. They are competing social media platforms.

That's the rub... They don't need to be monopolies to demonstrate monopolistic predilections. For federal prosecution de-facto monopolies will do.

At this point in time I think it's questionable as to whether or not the internet services are actually now as necessary as a utility. I believe that will be redefined in the near future.


Jo

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Is FB biased? Yes. It should be regulated as such. But FB claims to be unbiased. That is my only issue with it.

 

[aaronleland]

It's interesting that "conservatives" brag that they're the ones who are for capitalism, and they make the best businessmen, yet some of the biggest companies to ever exist are the constant targets of their ire.You'd figure with all that business acumen they possess they'd create a company that would blow Google, Twitter, Amazon, Facebook, etc. out of the water

You don't need politics to understand the potential damage of a Monopoly or a near Monopoly. The most dangerous men in world History were the Robber Barons of the Gilded age.

Jo

Start your own competitor.

I hear what you're saying and I agree.
That however does not alleviate the pressure from the already dominant Giants.
They will be broken up...and it will be a bipartisan decision not based on jealousy but based on the already numerous
Crimes that all of them have committed.

Jo

They are not monopolies because they are not essential services, and there are competitors. While a lot of people do use more than one social media platform there are people who have stopped using Facebook to use Instagram. Or stopped using Instagram to use Snapchat. Facebook and Twitter are not services unto themselves. They are competing social media platforms.

That's the rub... They don't need to be monopolies to demonstrate monopolistic predilections. For federal prosecution de-facto monopolies will do.

At this point in time I think it's questionable as to whether or not the internet services are actually now as necessary as a utility. I believe that will be redefined in the near future.


Jo

So your reasoning for breaking up a privately owned company that you acknowledge isn't a real monopoly is that it's a "de-facto" monopoly in your mind. Take that argument to the federal government, and see where it gets you.

 

[aaronleland]

The silliest part about this argument is that Facebook and Twitter are TOYS. They're TOYS. You don't need Twitter or Facebook. There are other websites on the internet. At least thousands of them. Maybe even tens of thousands.

 

[Manonthestreet]

You don't need politics to understand the potential damage of a Monopoly or a near Monopoly. The most dangerous men in world History were the Robber Barons of the Gilded age.

Jo

Start your own competitor.

I hear what you're saying and I agree.
That however does not alleviate the pressure from the already dominant Giants.
They will be broken up...and it will be a bipartisan decision not based on jealousy but based on the already numerous
Crimes that all of them have committed.

Jo

They are not monopolies because they are not essential services, and there are competitors. While a lot of people do use more than one social media platform there are people who have stopped using Facebook to use Instagram. Or stopped using Instagram to use Snapchat. Facebook and Twitter are not services unto themselves. They are competing social media platforms.

In some ways they...bet there isn't a govt agency in US that doesn't use them......Instagram is nowhere near what facebook is as an information platform

Instagram is owned by Facebook. My point is that people move from one to the other. It could be from Facebook to Instagram. It could be from Facebook to Twitter. It could be Twitter to whatever the fuck comes next. They are all under the umbrella of "social media". There is no "Facebook company" the same way there used to be a "telephone company".

Wow that was so convincing

 

[aaronleland]

Start your own competitor.

I hear what you're saying and I agree.
That however does not alleviate the pressure from the already dominant Giants.
They will be broken up...and it will be a bipartisan decision not based on jealousy but based on the already numerous
Crimes that all of them have committed.

Jo

They are not monopolies because they are not essential services, and there are competitors. While a lot of people do use more than one social media platform there are people who have stopped using Facebook to use Instagram. Or stopped using Instagram to use Snapchat. Facebook and Twitter are not services unto themselves. They are competing social media platforms.

In some ways they...bet there isn't a govt agency in US that doesn't use them......Instagram is nowhere near what facebook is as an information platform

Instagram is owned by Facebook. My point is that people move from one to the other. It could be from Facebook to Instagram. It could be from Facebook to Twitter. It could be Twitter to whatever the fuck comes next. They are all under the umbrella of "social media". There is no "Facebook company" the same way there used to be a "telephone company".

Wow that was so convincing

Tell me. What is a facebook? I didn't capitalize it, since it's obviously some utility in and of itself.

 

[justoffal]

You don't need politics to understand the potential damage of a Monopoly or a near Monopoly. The most dangerous men in world History were the Robber Barons of the Gilded age.

Jo

Start your own competitor.

I hear what you're saying and I agree.
That however does not alleviate the pressure from the already dominant Giants.
They will be broken up...and it will be a bipartisan decision not based on jealousy but based on the already numerous
Crimes that all of them have committed.

Jo

They are not monopolies because they are not essential services, and there are competitors. While a lot of people do use more than one social media platform there are people who have stopped using Facebook to use Instagram. Or stopped using Instagram to use Snapchat. Facebook and Twitter are not services unto themselves. They are competing social media platforms.

That's the rub... They don't need to be monopolies to demonstrate monopolistic predilections. For federal prosecution de-facto monopolies will do.

At this point in time I think it's questionable as to whether or not the internet services are actually now as necessary as a utility. I believe that will be redefined in the near future.


Jo

So your reasoning for breaking up a privately owned company that you acknowledge isn't a real monopoly is that it's a "de-facto" monopoly in your mind. Take that argument to the federal government, and see where it gets you.

It will get plenty. Recently Amazon was caught using dummy corporations to make illegal buys of large blocks of eBay purchasing space online. This is only likely only the tip of the iceberg of clandestine business practices that Amazon uses. EBay isn't even close to being a real competitor for Amazon. It poses absolutely no threat to Amazon's growth and yet they behaved in a predatory way towards a much smaller competitor. All of these things are approved straight from the top. A fixed legal fund is in place to deal with such legal expenses as pesky but acceptable CODB'S. This is the kind of misbehavior that will get them in trouble. When the structure of business fines in place fails to even make a dent or an impression on an overly large corporation such as Amazon fines are no longer an effective way of keeping them honest. They make more from the infringement then they lose from paying the fine. In effect the infringement becomes a calculated investment. This is how you know you're reaching Monopoly territory.

Jo

 

[aaronleland]

You are being children. Facebook is a toy. Twitter is a toy. Instagram is a toy. You don't need them. You are crying because somebody took your toy away. Find another toy.

 

[Manonthestreet]

You are being children. Facebook is a toy. Twitter is a toy. Instagram is a toy. You don't need them. You are crying because somebody took your toy away. Find another toy.

Pathetic lie

 

[aaronleland]

You are being children. Facebook is a toy. Twitter is a toy. Instagram is a toy. You don't need them. You are crying because somebody took your toy away. Find another toy.

Pathetic lie

Explain.

 

[Manonthestreet]

You are being children. Facebook is a toy. Twitter is a toy. Instagram is a toy. You don't need them. You are crying because somebody took your toy away. Find another toy.

Pathetic lie

Explain.

YOur post is nothing but ASSumption….as I stated never had an account,,,,,btw terrorist accounts are left to operate openly,,,,bet they dont think its a toy

 

[aaronleland]

You are being children. Facebook is a toy. Twitter is a toy. Instagram is a toy. You don't need them. You are crying because somebody took your toy away. Find another toy.

Pathetic lie

Explain.

YOur post is nothing but ASSumption….as I stated never had an account,,,,,btw terrorist accounts are left to operate openly,,,,bet they dont think its a toy

You prove my point. I've never had a Facebook or Instagram either. I created a Twitter a couple years back, and used it so seldom that Gracie had to tell me she thought it had been hacked. I never went on to confirm whether is had been or not. I couldn't be bothered. We don't need them. They're toys.

 

[Manonthestreet]

You are being children. Facebook is a toy. Twitter is a toy. Instagram is a toy. You don't need them. You are crying because somebody took your toy away. Find another toy.

Pathetic lie

Explain.

YOur post is nothing but ASSumption….as I stated never had an account,,,,,btw terrorist accounts are left to operate openly,,,,bet they dont think its a toy

You prove my point. I've never had a Facebook or Instagram either. I created a Twitter a couple years back, and used it so seldom that Gracie had to tell me she thought it had been hacked. I never went on to confirm whether is had been or not. I couldn't be bothered. We don't need them. They're toys.

You prove you dont understand the issue or the growing threat

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

In some ways they...bet there isn't a govt agency in US that doesn't use them

How is that at all relevant?

 

[aaronleland]

You are being children. Facebook is a toy. Twitter is a toy. Instagram is a toy. You don't need them. You are crying because somebody took your toy away. Find another toy.

Pathetic lie

Explain.

YOur post is nothing but ASSumption….as I stated never had an account,,,,,btw terrorist accounts are left to operate openly,,,,bet they dont think its a toy

You prove my point. I've never had a Facebook or Instagram either. I created a Twitter a couple years back, and used it so seldom that Gracie had to tell me she thought it had been hacked. I never went on to confirm whether is had been or not. I couldn't be bothered. We don't need them. They're toys.

You prove you dont understand the issue or the growing threat

Growing threat of what? It's the internet. Create your own fucking service. Both Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg created Twitter and Facebook while they were still in college. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps, slacker.

 

[beagle9]

Yeah, I've brought that up many times. Nothing is stopping a few conservative techie nerds from creating their own social media platform for the right, or better yet, for everyone without engaging in bias of any kind and give FB and Twitter a run for their money.

It's interesting that "conservatives" brag that they're the ones who are for capitalism, and they make the best businessmen, yet some of the biggest companies to ever exist are the constant targets of their ire.You'd figure with all that business acumen they possess they'd create a company that would blow Google, Twitter, Amazon, Facebook, etc. out of the water

You don't need politics to understand the potential damage of a Monopoly or a near Monopoly. The most dangerous men in world History were the Robber Barons of the Gilded age.

Jo

Start your own competitor.

I hear what you're saying and I agree.
That however does not alleviate the pressure from the already dominant Giants.
They will be broken up...and it will be a bipartisan decision not based on jealousy but based on the already numerous
Crimes that all of them have committed.

Jo

They are not monopolies because they are not essential services, and there are competitors. While a lot of people do use more than one social media platform there are people who have stopped using Facebook to use Instagram. Or stopped using Instagram to use Snapchat. Facebook and Twitter are not services unto themselves. They are competing social media platforms.

Do they only become these evil monopolies if they decide to engage in unfair practices by way of their power in which they have been entrusted with, and not so much is it about their services provided whether competing or not competing fairly with the other competition ???

Otherwise monopolies are no threat unless they become a threat by usage of their power in a bad way. Correct ??

 

[beagle9]

The silliest part about this argument is that Facebook and Twitter are TOYS. They're TOYS. You don't need Twitter or Facebook. There are other websites on the internet. At least thousands of them. Maybe even tens of thousands.

Toy's that can sway elections by involving themselves in politics, and then taking a stand in those politics ??

 

[skye]

The silliest part about this argument is that Facebook and Twitter are TOYS. They're TOYS. You don't need Twitter or Facebook. There are other websites on the internet. At least thousands of them. Maybe even tens of thousands.

Toy's that can sway elections by involving themselves in politics, and then taking a stand in those politics ??

Exactly!

Toy my eye.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

You prove you dont understand the issue or the growing threat

What's the threat? Is it your assertion that conservatives aren't smart enough to stay informed about the issues without Twitter and Facebook?

 

[beagle9]

You prove you dont understand the issue or the growing threat

What's the threat? Is it your assertion that conservatives aren't smart enough to stay informed about the issues without Twitter and Facebook?

The threat is a huge power using that power to suppress free speech or speech it doesn't like, yet all the while providing paths or platforms to those for whom it does like. Otherwise taking a side even if the side taken might not be the right side in accordance with the majority of citizens in this country or even within their user base.