
The techlash against Amazon, Facebook and Google, and what they can do - known
https://www.economist.com/briefing/2018/01/20/the-techlash-against-amazon-facebook-and-google-and-what-they-can-do
======
wonderbear
You know writing has missed the mark when the only discussion is around the
literary conceit.

Also let's please not start saying "techlash".

~~~
Nasrudith
Honestly the whole concept seems like a media push by vested interests even
considering my own bubbles and biases. I have encountered little of it from
actual commenters - not even in areas where astroturfing and axe grinding is
rampant. Anti-Facebook people usually just say delete your Facebook account
not trust bust it. Anti-Amazon usually object to warehouse conditions and
complain of counterfit products. Small business owners use it to project their
reach. I have purchased comics from Amazon before and it was shipped directly
from a neighboring state's comic book shop for one.

The concept of splitting is inane really - what would make a good division?

The selective condemnation is also highly suspicious - Comcast is one of the
most hated companies and yet they don't talk about splitting them up or their
defacto actual monopolies?

~~~
mc32
Journalism would be better off not taking liberties just so they can push
their PoV.

Yes, there may be reasons to regulate some aspects of tech, and we can have
discussions about the merits of breaking companies up.

However, the tendency to gang up and form public opinion on the public’s
behalf is concerning and rightfully leads to suspicion on the media, their
intentions and allegiance (truth, narrative, etc.)

------
marsrover
Good job to Larry Page for side stepping and putting Sundar under the
spotlight.

------
known
[https://archive.st/3mp8](https://archive.st/3mp8)

~~~
bduerst
Tangental, but the mobile experience is terrible:
[https://i.imgur.com/yW4VZNV.png](https://i.imgur.com/yW4VZNV.png)

~~~
known
[http://archive.fo/rjUB3](http://archive.fo/rjUB3)

------
gniv
Note that this is from January.

------
growlist
> what they can do

I do find the presumptiousness of this type of clickbaity headline amusing, as
if those three utter behemoths don't likely have vast amounts of brainpower
deployed at corporate strategy already!

------
whydead2
Do you think the CC'd recipients actually email each other or participate in
elite email chains like this?

That'd be something else.

~~~
mikejb
I'm not sure those email addresses are real. This seems more like a PR piece
for the consulting company.

But they so write each other from time to time, at least I remember something
along those lines from the no-poaching emails that surfaced in a lawsuit about
agreed salary caps (My memory might be corrupted here, I'm not sure about it)

~~~
saagarjha
The address are not real, just like the email exchange. I think the consulting
company is fake as well; the email format is just a stylistic choice to dress
up the article in a different way.

------
msl09
Isn't that article just corporate propaganda?

~~~
leowoo91
Not, if you think it is suggesting giants to slow down a little.

~~~
msl09
Ah right, thanks for pointing that out. For some reason I read it as several
emails sent from tech giants addressing the public concerns about themselves.

------
saagarjha
Ehh, I'm not sure if I liked this piece that much. I think it's grossly
oversimplifying the issues and presenting the solution as "do this, not that,
and everything will be ok". Also:

> Tim Cook <timcook@apple.com>

That's not his real email.

~~~
igravious
It's a literary conceit:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceit)
ergo fictional addresses have been used, and madey-uppy corporate name
referencing key idea from economist Adam Smith.

edit: Well, I liked it. I don't think it grossly oversimplified the issues.

Clearly big tech operates monopolies. Probably Google/Alphabet should never
have been allowed top buy DoubleClick. Facebook definitely should not have
been allowed to buy Instagram and WhatsApp. Microsoft _still_ has a desktop
monopoly. As the article says Amazon controls 40% of online commerce (in the
US). Imagine controlling 40% of bricks and mortar trade. The mind boggles.
Apple has competition in every area _but_ they lock their users in to their
ecosystem in a way that is not seen in other markets. Imagine if you bought a
car and then you had to keep buying cars from that manufacturer because
switching brands was too much of a hassle. Or banks. Or whatever. Netflix has
competition so they're fine.

It's not a crime to have huge valuations. It should make people sit up and
take notice. I don't think FAAAM will reform themselves. If it wasn't for open
source and Linux things would be way way worse. If the regulators don't do
their job it'll be up to people like us to build open source products to
neuter these companies. Probably we should be doing that anyway.

~~~
kkarakk
lots of people do exactly that do. brand loyalty has some element of
perception of difficulty in switching built in. you buy an iPhone coz you
think finding all the apps you use will be too difficult. you buy a Toyota coz
you think buying anything else would be a waste of money. you stick with a
bank coz the thought of re-doing the documentation and talking to customer
care is repulsive

companies spend a lot of time and money on enforcing that perception sometimes
even acquiring other companies to do so.

------
cityzen
The irony about all of this is that you can live a perfectly normal life
without Amazon, Facebook or Google these days. We sat around and watched in
fascination and then horror as these companies became the "BAADD" companies
they are today. Why does anyone expect them to self regulate? When you grow a
business to this size, you not only learn a lot about your product and
business but you also learn a lot about manhandling DC. As long as lobbying is
a thing (FB has spent around $7 million this year alone), this is the shit
sandwich we're all going to be eating for awhile.

~~~
MrEfficiency
>The irony about all of this is that you can live a perfectly normal life
without Amazon, Facebook or Google these days.

What is considered 'Normal'. If I want users to find my website, they use
google.

If I want to buy all of my components for a project and get them in 2 days, I
use Amazon.

I suppose these are avoidable, I'd lose about 200 users a day + use digikey
and spend more on 2 day shipping...

To be competitive I need to use these services.

I cant say the same about Facebook, Apple, and Netflix. I dont use those
services.

