Sign in / up

back to article 'Break up Google and Facebook if you ever want innovation again'

If the tech industry wants another wave of innovation to match the PC or the internet, Google and Facebook must be broken up, journalist and film producer Jonathan Taplin told an audience at University College London's Faculty of Law this week. He was speaking at an event titled Crisis in Copyright Policy: How the digital …

COMMENTS

Post your comment
House rules Send corrections
Add to 'My topics' unstar *

Page:

  1. werdsmith Silver badge

    No need to break up faecebook, just require them to use a standard with an open API. Like browsers, email and everything else internet before these people got involved who see it as their life's mission to make their company into the de-facto web starting silo services.

    So, a person who chooses to use Diaspora could add in a contact that they know is a Faecebook user, and vice versa and continue to see their updates.

    54 5 Reply
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Faecebook

      I like your spelling.

      33 2 Reply
      1. el kabong
        Reply Icon

        Re: Faecebook

        I like it too. Two upvotes, one for each of you.

        14 1 Reply
    2. Daggerchild Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      Concurrence

      Agreed. Any system, where it's easy to get data in, and hard to get it out again, should be avoided or prevented at all costs. If we somehow got acclimatised to such data entrapment it would be fatal for competition.

      Now if you'll excuse me, I've got Excel spreadsheets and Word docs to write, according to my Exchange calendar.

      25 0 Reply
      1. AndersBreiner
        Reply Icon

        Re: Concurrence

        You can edit Excel and Word documents on LibreOffice or OpenOffice. And Google calendar works pretty well with applications on Windows. Mac, Android and so on. Google allows you to export your data

        https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/3024190?hl=en

        And you can set up IMAP for email and sync that to multiple offline copies in case something terrible happens to Google.

        I'd be more worried about FB to be honest. They've got nasty habit of blocking people for increasing amounts of time based on bogus complaints. But it depends what you do there. If you only use them for messaging and never actually post a status update, you'll be fine. Especially if you make sure you can contact people by another method if something happens to your account.

        2 2 Reply
      2. veti Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: Concurrence

        "Fatal to competition" is always overstated.

        It's only 20 years ago, when Microsoft looked like an unassailable monopoly. It wasn't antitrust suits that broke that hold, it was technological change - innovation, mostly by Google and Apple and to a lesser extent Amazon, that left Microsoft in the dust, despite their monopoly position.

        Remember 10 years ago, we all thought Google was basically the advertising monopolist? Now Facebook has joined them.

        And the same will happen again. "Incumbent advantage" has a limited shelf life - it only lasts until someone routes around it.

        8 3 Reply
    3. Triumphantape
      Reply Icon

      Yes kudos on "faecebook"

      But I think breaking it up or, ideally, getting rid of faecebook would be the best approach.

      5 0 Reply
      1. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Reply Icon
        Megaphone

        Re: Yes kudos on "faecebook"

        "But I think breaking it up or, ideally, getting rid of faecebook would be the best approach."

        why must a heavy-handed GUMMINT-style "solution" be set against Google and Face-bitch, just because a lot of us do not LIKE them ???

        Seriously, if they're NOT engaging in any kind of "unfair business practices", but instead are just providing "a service" for free or for money, and anyone ELSE could come along and do what they do without being interfered with, then WHERE is the problem that requires A GUMMINT to "break up the duopoly" ???

        Now, if they ARE engaging in anti-competitive "unfair business practices", then they deserve whatever legal remedies are inflicted upon them. Otherwise, they should be LEFT ALONE.

        2 9 Reply
        1. JohnFen
          Reply Icon

          Re: Yes kudos on "faecebook"

          I would argue that being unable to avoid being spied on by them (simply not using their services does not stop the spying) is in itself an unfair business practice at the very least. It should be criminal.

          9 0 Reply
        2. Mark 110
          Reply Icon

          Re: Yes kudos on "faecebook"

          "why must a heavy-handed GUMMINT-style "solution" be set against Google and Face-bitch, just because a lot of us do not LIKE them ???"

          Its economic theory. When a player develops a monopoly position its bad for consumers in the medium to long term, particularly when that dominant position can be used to expand the monopoly into other markets. (See Googles expansion from search into services and prioritizing its services in search results.)

          Capitalist theory relies on competitive markets to benefit society. Monopolies don't do that (benefit society) usually.

          6 0 Reply
          1. Charles 9
            Reply Icon

            Re: Yes kudos on "faecebook"

            Put it this way. Think of the business world like a poker tournament. At some point, someone gets a big lead and can use that lead to bully everyone else off the table unless the opponent gets lucky ("Next Big Thing" paradigm shifts like Facebook); what's barely a decimal point to them becomes all-in do-or-die for you.

            3 0 Reply
    4. rtb61
      Reply Icon

      Why Bother

      No need to breakup facebook because regardless of the lies of the bankster, facebook is a fad and will organically break up on its own. Basically the corporate dicks will simply seek to exploit the market dominance and drive away end users, as for myspace so for facebook. It is inevitable just a matter of when.

      2 0 Reply
  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Start at the bottom, we're still on C and x86, so much for the cell.

    4 0 Reply
  3. Platypus
    Facepalm

    There are plenty of reasons to criticize Google and Facebook, but lack of innovation is not one of them. A large part of the reason is this thing we call open source, to which both contribute a great deal. The author would do well to read about open source, specifically how it prevents the kind of enclosure and stagnation he's worried about. The fact that one site can copy another's superficial features is a *good* thing, because the alternative is exactly the kind of intellectual-property regime that leads to the worst kinds of monopoly. Would the world be better if Amazon (should be the true target of his screed) had prevailed on the one-click patent, or Apple on all the "look and feel" stuff? Hardly.

    13 20 Reply
    1. Mage Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Flame

      but lack of innovation is not one of them.

      Yes it is.

      Google has bought in or copied most of its successful stuff except search. Search is getting worse.

      Facebook has only innovated on privacy theft in a way Stazi and Stalin's secret police could only have dreamed of.

      They are parasites.

      Though Google Search was once best and was brilliant, they didn't invent Search.

      Facebook was late to Social Media.

      Both successful, not innovators.

      53 6 Reply
      1. Robert Grant
        Reply Icon

        Re: but lack of innovation is not one of them.

        Let's not be silly.

        If the Stazi wanted to keep tabs on your secret meeting, they would surveil you. If Facebook wanted to...oh wait, they don't. They just store what you give them.

        9 10 Reply
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Stop

          Re: but lack of innovation is not one of them.

          "They just store what you give them."

          No they don't

          They store what they take. Big difference. If you have visted this site without the likes of No Script, they know you visited it.

          Do you "give" them that info?

          35 1 Reply
        2. Mage Silver badge
          Reply Icon
          Black Helicopters

          Re: They just store what you give them

          Facebook's icon they offer to website builders has javascript that tracks everyone. Not just Facebook users.

          NoScript is your friend.

          23 0 Reply
          1. bombastic bob Silver badge
            Reply Icon
            Devil

            Re: They just store what you give them

            if you don't have a Faece-Bitch account, does that stupid 'F' icon (and its script) STILL track you?

            [I'm just curious]

            1 0 Reply
            1. BebopWeBop
              Reply Icon

              Re: They just store what you give them

              If you are not careful (cookies et al) then yes they will

              7 0 Reply
            2. Jamie Jones Silver badge
              Reply Icon
              Joke

              Re: They just store what you give them

              Every time I see a post on El Reg from Bombastic Bob, I post it and it's meta-data to facebook!

              0 0 Reply
            3. el_oscuro
              Reply Icon

              Re: They just store what you give them

              Unless you have this in your /etc/hosts:

              # Blocking facebook

              # https://winbeginner.com/block-facebook-hosts-file-windows-pc/

              #127.0.0.1 facebook.com

              #127.0.0.1 www.facebook.com

              #127.0.0.1 login.facebook.com

              #127.0.0.1 www.login.facebook.com

              #127.0.0.1 fbcdn.net

              #127.0.0.1 www.fbcdn.net

              #127.0.0.1 fbcdn.com

              #127.0.0.1 www.fbcdn.com

              #127.0.0.1 static.ak.fbcdn.net

              #127.0.0.1 static.ak.connect.facebook.com

              #127.0.0.1 connect.facebook.net

              #127.0.0.1 www.connect.facebook.net

              #127.0.0.1 apps.facebook.com

              127.0.0.1 searchincognito.com

              127.0.0.1 www.searchincognito.com

              # Block Facebook IPv6

              #fe80::1%lo0 localhost

              #::1 facebook.com

              #::1 www.facebook.com

              #::1 login.facebook.com

              #::1 www.login.facebook.com

              #::1 fbcdn.net

              #::1 www.fbcdn.net

              #::1 fbcdn.com

              #::1 www.fbcdn.com

              #::1 static.ak.fbcdn.net

              #::1 static.ak.connect.facebook.com

              #::1 connect.facebook.net

              #::1 www.connect.facebook.net

              #::1 apps.facebook.com

              #::1 edge-star6-shv-02-ams2.facebook.com

              Pi-holing facebook.com would work too.

              0 0 Reply
        3. Captain DaFt
          Reply Icon

          Re: but lack of innovation is not one of them.

          If Facebook wanted to...oh wait, they don't. They just store what you give them.

          Even if that data's about a non-facebook user.

          Also collects data from third parties, and via datr cookies about non-users to build profiles.

          https://spideroak.com/articles/facebook-shadow-profiles-a-profile-of-you-that-you-never-created/

          The Stazi were slackers by comparison.

          6 0 Reply
        4. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: but lack of innovation is not one of them.

          Do you mean "Stasi"? Clue: it doesn't rhyme with "Nazi" and the two words are also spelt differently.

          0 1 Reply
      2. Daggerchild Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: but lack of innovation is not one of them.

        Mmm.. no. Google's MO is to enter a known field and solve the problems therein so completely that they make everyone else look bad (unless it involves Social), earning their eternal seething hatred.

        That's not the same as 'copying' or 'buying in' or everyone could do this.

        3 13 Reply
        1. sabroni Silver badge
          Reply Icon

          Re: solve the problems therein so completely that they make everyone else look bad

          Where the problems are "humans having privacy" and "musicians making money from the music they make". They've certainly put a stop to both of them....

          20 1 Reply
        2. Mage Silver badge
          Reply Icon

          Re: Google's MO is to enter a known field and solve the problems

          Google Maps? no

          Google Earth? no (bought in)

          YouTube (bought in)

          Android (bought in, Davik/apps is basically desktop JVM/Java because they could only get cut down Mobile Java licence)

          Chrome Browser? no

          Chrome OS, Google Docs: me too Cloud products with hidden costs.

          Hangouts, GMail, Google Groups, Talk, Video: Me Too stuff offered for free.

          Google's "AI" is just 1980s Expert Systems with so called "Neural Networks" to make adding human curated data easy. More hype than solution. Still no decent grammar & spelling checker any better than mid 1980s. OK Google is simply 1990s voice recognition moved to cloud and added to text search engine + updated Eliza.

          Search used to be really good, but they weren't first and the ones killed off were more honest than Google's current "bookmark" plus client advert polluted results.

          Streetview WiFi slurp was no accident. Not needed now due to Chrome Browser, Android and ChromeOS.

          So which field have Google entered and solved the problems?

          I've been using "personal" computers since before IBM PC and Computers as a user & programmer earlier. Professional programming & IT services since 1980.

          Self Driving cars are still an experiment. Their AI medical system might be a ploy to steal data, the UK data was illegally obtained. Is it really AI at all? See IBM and Medical AI.

          17 3 Reply
          1. Daggerchild Silver badge
            Reply Icon

            Re: Google's MO is to enter a known field and solve the problems

            So, when Microsoft tries exactly the same stuff, with their equivalently vast money and influence, why doesn't it work? Did they 'just' buy the wrong startup? Are Google 'just' lucky?

            Most of your 'just' things aren't remotely 'just' things. 'Just' a champion AI. 'Just' a self-driving car. 'Just' the most developed browser and phone OS. I think you're wilfully ignoring, well, everything.

            But hey, by your own standards, you're 'just' a neural network, yes? :)

            3 5 Reply
      3. Richocet
        Reply Icon

        Re: but lack of innovation is not one of them.

        Google did have some tech innovations such as non-locking distributed data updating. Basically their crawlers updating the search database while large volumes of queries were being run against that data.

        Their labs projects were quite innovative too.

        They shut most of that down now years ago but their profits continue to grow, their deceitfulness about spying/data collection grows, and their tax avoidance activities flourish.

        7 0 Reply
      4. Kiwi
        Reply Icon
        Devil

        Re: but lack of innovation is not one of them.

        Search is getting worse.

        Where can I send your prize for "understatement of the decade"? Surely this must win, hands down.

        --> Icon coz about as "under" as you can get.

        --> Or should I be using Paris for that?

        0 0 Reply
    2. RyokuMas
      Reply Icon
      Stop

      Give & take

      A large part of the reason is this thing we call open source, to which both contribute a great deal.

      I'll just leave this here...

      16 0 Reply
    3. Mage Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Facepalm

      Amazon … one-click patent, or Apple "look and feel"

      Two other separate issues.

      I've quite separate criticism of Apple and Amazon, who are completely different. Amazon is the dangerous one, not Apple.

      Amazon is like the Borg, hoovering up competition. See what they have bought. Goodreads, Abe Books, Book Depository, the two companies they merged to make CreateSpace and IMDB are tip of the iceberg. Their "prime" is predatory to consumers and cheats authors.

      Apple has bought in most of their "innovation". Nearly went bust and was rescued by MS money. iTunes and Operator packages made iPod and iPhone a success. Don't confuse "Design Patents" (UK Registered Design) and actual Patents. US Patent system broken since Victorian era. Edison over exploited it so eventually his bogus Cinema patents (the reason for Hollywood) struck out. Apple less than 2% on R&D and like a dragon on their cash hoard. At the end of the day no-one is forced to buy any Apple stuff and they don't have any kind of monopoly. They are not a Borg like Amazon. They have bought only a few companies very strategic to their few products, Fingerworks for iOS touch and an ARM design house so they could switch from Samsung CPUs (first iPhone was SC6400 Samsung family ARM). Though the last really innovative Apple product was the Newton, killed by Jobs on his return. If the iTunes (not Job's idea) hadn't saved Apple via iPod, some Chinese company might own the Mac brand today. (c.f. Thinkpad). The exclusive operator and all you can eat data when other smart phones could only be afforded by Corporate users cemented Apple as a consumer success.

      13 2 Reply
    4. Ian Michael Gumby
      Reply Icon
      Boffin

      @Platypus...

      The funny thing about FOSS... its a false economy.

      But back to the article's author's point.

      If you run NoScript (The latest verision) you can see what scripts El Reg runs.

      Why do they have Google Analytics and Google tag services? Could they not run their own analytics internally?

      Free clue. This is why Google has a monopoly on the ad services ...

      Then there's facebook. Why run js code from facebook.net?

      The author is correct in his assertions. You may not know this unless you're old enough to remember the birth of the PC.

      8 0 Reply
  4. Mage Silver badge

    Regulation

    They are breaking actual real laws today. What we need is enforcement of law on Internet companies, they are not special and innovative and think laws only apply to bricks and mortar high street shops.

    Also they think paying taxes and privacy only applies ordinary workers, not companies and shareholders.

    31 2 Reply
    1. IceC0ld
      Reply Icon
      Megaphone

      Re: Regulation

      Also they think paying taxes and privacy only applies ordinary workers, not companies and shareholders.

      as much as I agree with this comment, the reality is that the answer is in properly constructed laws, as all business has a duty to its share holders to maximise returns, so they spend a fortune looking for ways to bypass the existing law

      IIRC Reagan when governor of Califonia cut business rate / tax to 10%, thereby removing the ability to spend money to cicumvent the law, when a full payment would be less than than the old high rate + the cost of the lawyers doing their nefarious dealings

      TL:DR

      we need to sort the LAW out, to make it so every Co pays what they owe in FULL to whichever country they take the deal from

      10 1 Reply
      1. kain preacher
        Reply Icon

        Re: Regulation

        IIRC Reagan when governor of Califonia cut business rate / tax to 10%, thereby removing the ability to spend money to cicumvent the law, when a full payment would be less than than the old high rate + the cost of the lawyers doing their nefarious dealings.

        Um no. If you know how California works they just take your money then you are the one that has to pay lawyers to get it back.

        1 2 Reply
      2. smot
        Reply Icon

        Re: Regulation

        "as all business has a duty to its share holders to maximise returns, so they spend a fortune looking for ways to bypass the existing law"

        Not so. It's up to shareholders collectively to decide on the business strategy, however done, and maximising returns does not have to be the sole mantra. Suggesting that spending a fortune on ways to bypass the existing law is therefore a non sequitur and is disingenuous to many organisations.

        5 0 Reply
      3. strum
        Reply Icon

        Re: Regulation

        >the answer is in properly constructed laws,

        The problem being that the corporations in question can make the laws happen the way they want them to.

        >as all business has a duty to its share holders to maximise returns

        Not strictly true (despite being constantly repeated).

        6 1 Reply
    2. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      FAIL

      Re: Regulation

      "They are breaking actual real laws today."

      which ones? Just because you say it, doesn't make it real. It DOES imply "fake news" though.

      Proof, please. Otherwise, 'fake news' regardless of how many fanbois and howler monkeys up-vote you due to "wish fulfillment" or something.

      1 7 Reply
  5. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken

    'Break up Google and Facebook if you ever want innovation again'

    Added boni: better privacy, less manipulation. What's not to like?

    10 0 Reply
  6. Teiwaz

    Break up all large companies

    Humans spent most of our history evolving in small tribal units - it's the social group style we are most human.

    In large ones, we tend to more insect like behaviour.

    Locust like, ravening on any discovered new resource in a gluttonous mass.

    Methodical hive-like,striping one resource after another mechanically, first the cob, then the stalks, with the bulk of the 'royal honey' funnelled to the top.

    hmm, maybe Quatermass the pit was right and we were seeded by insects from Mars after all.

    6 2 Reply
  7. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    We have containers, we have DevOps, we have the cloud and we have the iPhone X

    What more innovation could we possibly handle?

    5 0 Reply
    1. Tim Seventh
      Reply Icon
      Thumb Up

      Re: We have containers, we have DevOps, we have the cloud and we have the iPhone X

      "We have containers, we have DevOps, we have the cloud and we have the iPhone X. What more innovation could we possibly handle?"

      Laser sharks in a sharknado with flying cars and hover-board in light speed! Insanity Innovation at its best.

      5 0 Reply
  8. Jonathan Schwatrz

    Never going to happen.

    For the simple reason that Google et al are American companies, and if they got broken up it would mean the US would lose real dominance of the Internet. Sure, different Whitehouse administrations may throw the odd grumble in their direction, but they'd be terrified that breaking up a company like Google would give a chance to foreign companies - do you think the NSA/FBI/DEA/CIA would be happier with Baidu in Google's place?

    9 2 Reply
    1. JohnFen
      Reply Icon

      Re: Never going to happen.

      "Google et al are American companies"

      Technically, this is true. Effectively, this is not true. Google et al are truly multinationals and have no special loyalty or connection to any particular nation. Google does not enhance US domination. Google enhances Google's domination.

      5 2 Reply
      1. Jonathan Schwatrz
        Reply Icon
        Facepalm

        Re: JohnFen Re: Never going to happen.

        "....Effectively, this is not true..... Google enhances Google's domination." So you missed all the visits to the Obama WH? Google makes sure that Google's plans dovetail neatly with what the US authorities require as they know any administration would rather work with them than confront them. Even Trump's is starting to bend as Google carefully alters their approach to match the Trump administration's requirements. Even Trump would rather deal with Google than have say a Chinese company holding all the cards.

        1 1 Reply
        1. Charles 9
          Reply Icon

          Re: JohnFen Never going to happen.

          ONLY when it's convenient for them to honey up to the US government. Look what happened in China; conditions got too hostile so Google bailed out of there. Google is approaching Sprawl levels of power, becoming transnational and almost sovereign unto itself, able to persuade, threaten, and in the extreme leave a country that won't help them, taking their jobs and tax revenues with them (10% of something versus 100% of nothing).

          0 0 Reply
    2. HandleAlreadyTaken
      Reply Icon

      Re: Never going to happen.

      >For the simple reason that Google et al are American companies, and if they got broken up it would mean the US would lose real dominance of the Internet.

      That would imply that congresscritters care about America. Watching their activities, it doesn't seem to be the case. You're right however that it won't happen, but for a different reason. Google, well aware its whole business model is based on shaky moral and legal grounds, are on track to become the biggest spender on lobbying in the USA. As long as they keep their shopping bag full of congressmen, Google is in no danger of legislative action.

      8 0 Reply
  9. Duncan Macdonald

    Andrew really hates Google

    Can you think of ONE bit of positive reporting on Google by Andrew?

    The big problem with innovation at the moment is that to be successful you need a big bank balance. A small company (or an individual) finds it very difficult to go from new idea to production due to the startup costs (which may well include patent lawyers). For many the best hope is to sell the idea to a larger company (eg Google) rather than lose their shirts trying to compete with the big boys.

    (Note - this is not specific to computing but applies to most established industries.)

    Only in a field with no big competitors does the small fry have much of a chance.

    5 8 Reply
    1. Mage Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Coat

      Re: Can you think of ONE bit of positive reporting on Google?

      In fairness, what is there positive to report?

      That they quietly dropped "Do no evil"?

      That Eric Schmidt says governments should give teens a new ID when they come of age?

      That Google promises they won't read email sent to gmail addresses or cloud stuff of educational users?

      If anything Andrew is quite soft on them. There are of course UK libel laws.

      13 1 Reply

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

Forgotten password ?

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like