this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2024
309 points (79.0% liked)

Technology

58092 readers
3731 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

With Google's recent monopoly status being a topic a discussion recently. This article from 2017 argues that we should nationalize these platforms in the age of platform capitalism. Ahead of its time, in fact the author predicted the downfall of Ello.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BelatedPeacock@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The only thing worse than a monopoly is a government owned monopoly

[–] jabjoe@feddit.uk 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You prefer your monopolies to not be democratically accountable?

I prefer no monopolies, but if it's something that is a natural monopoly, I certainly don't want it by a for profit foreign company.

Maybe the answer is to split these guys up by country and each government decides what they do with their chunk. We'll see which works best.

Independent not for profits, straight up nationalised, private still(baby Bell), publicly owned and privately run, etc etc.

[–] BelatedPeacock@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Best case it's gonna get bloated and beurocratic (any monopoly, but especially state run ones) and if it's government owned they'll use the power of the government to prevent competition (more than a private monopoly which will still try but won't have as much power to do so).

Worst case it goes off the rails and the service is unavailable/unusable. If it's anything important - say the Soviet's food production - anybody who needs that service doesn't get it.

[–] jabjoe@feddit.uk 1 points 4 weeks ago

See things is, I'm a Brit. Water and rail are going to be brought back under groverment control because running them privately has failed. Buses are another one where when the local government has taken back over, services have improved. Partly because they are run providing a service, not a profit.

Certain bit of society's infrastructure is better run at a loss for the better running of the wider economy. If every bit is run at a profit, the whole can be less profitable. Most countries don't have all private road system. France has lot of private motorways, which are strangely empty, because the local avoid them because of cost. Like the M6 Toll in the UK.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There's not really much difference. Either way it's a legal entity defined by the state and run by the extremely privileged.

[–] BelatedPeacock@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

One has the power of corporate lawyers to enforce it's will, one has an army and a prison system to enforce it's will.