|
|
|
|
|
by auntad
2887 days ago
|
|
This sounds like a big deal, but doesn't seem to be getting attention. Am I missing something? Giants like Facebook, Twitter, etc. have a huge competitive advantage because of their user moats. There are a countless number of people who hate Facebook, but stay on it "because everyone is there" and use the one or two convenient features they appreciate, like Events or Groups. If this initiative is for real, goodbye inferior products like all the stuff Facebook has stuck into its ecosystem (Groups, Events, Messenger, etc etc) and hello super-speciailized companies that can piggy-back on existing user moats (moats no longer). This is obviously fantastic for the consumer, but seems to destroy something that I thought to be key to each of their bottom lines. Why are they doing this? |
|
- Generally encourages more data to be out there and available
- Pressures companies like Facebook to play along, weakening their data strongholds, lest they be painted as the bad guys
- Gets a lot of goodwill and, more importantly, user trust, which encourages people to give them even more data
While Google's interests seem to align with consumer interests more often than those of the other tech oligarchs, they don't do anything out of sheer good will.