[ben_w]

They have the capacity to be bad, but for example Apple (who are in a similar place WRT this) started with apps you can’t remove and has now made most of them removable; and last time I looked (a while ago now) many unremovable Android apps came from the phone vendor.

I’m all in favour of keeping companies under a close eye to make sure they don’t become an abusive monopoly — my naïve political philosophy is that power should be conserved, so the more e.g. economic power you have the less e.g. free market choice you should be allowed — but I don’t see in Google[0] what you see in them.

Also? If they can easily become a natural monopoly, decentralisation won’t solve anything in the long term.

[0] nor Apple, Netflix, Tesla, SpaceX, Twitter, or Microsoft; but that is how I see Facebook and Amazon.

[silasdavis]

> If they can easily become a natural monopoly, decentralisation won’t solve anything in the long term.

I don't follow the reasoning here.

[ben_w]

Saying something is naturally a monopoly is equivalent to saying it’s naturally not decentralised. They’re opposites.