100 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 15 Aug \ on: Google is a monopoly. The fix isn't obvious tech
As someone that uses non-Google services for everything I have a problem with the way we define monopoly.
- What if the cure is worse than the disease?
- What if as Google abuses its market position competitors gain market share (effectively solving the problem)
- What if people are more happy with Google than any competitor? Are they wrong?
Conversations about monopoly get really hard to rationalize about without clear definitions. Google dominates many markets in tech, that isn't in question. Personally I choose to not use them but I'm the exception. Why? Alternatives work just fine. In some cases they are superior.
The main argument against monopolies are that they abuse their market dominance to the detriment of their customers.
The state (government) has a monopoly on governance and violence. Do we really think they do not abuse this monopoly? How easy is it to change governments? Sure we have elections but do you really think that changes things? Its not like switching companies. I can assure you it is far easier to de-google your life than to remove the influence of the state in your life.
Google is a company that has to entice the public to use its services. They have killed that. The state uses violence to steal the productive resources of its citizens. They allow us to pick our rulers from a small subset of elites. So that makes it all good right?
I'm not a fan of Google. The solution to both monopolies is to make them obsolete and we have far more ability to do that to Google than the state.