Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cbradford 1742 days ago
For over 100 years we have had laws and rules that prescribe that when a firm or industry reaches monopoly statue they must act as a common carrier and not discriminate. Been that way since telephones and railroads. People should understand history, this is not a new challenge and the solutions are already on the books.

https://blog.scorchedweb.com/technology/supreme-court-on-con...
2 comments
AnIdiotOnTheNet 1742 days ago
Personally I think anything that's a natural monopoly should probably be the purview of the government anyway, since that's as close to an entity acting solely in the public good as we can get.

However, I also don't count any current social media entity as a monopoly.

link
gruez 1742 days ago
>For over 100 years we have had laws and rules that prescribe that when a firm or industry reaches monopoly statue they must act as a common carrier and not discriminate.

Was that because they got big, or was it because they were granted a government monopoly?

link
kaibee 1742 days ago
> Was that because they got big, or was it because they were granted a government monopoly?

The first one. Natural monopolies exist. This libertarian talking point of "there wouldn't be monopolies without government intervention" is lunacy.

link
gruez 1742 days ago
>The first one.

Can you provide the legislative history that supports this? According to wikipedia airlines, cell phone companies, cruise ships, and shipping companies operate as common carriers, even though none of them are controlled by monopolies.

> Natural monopolies exist. This libertarian talking point of "there wouldn't be monopolies without government intervention" is lunacy.

I'm not a libertarian, but I can still see the difference between "it would be really expensive to lay another set of phone lines" and "the state forbids you from laying another set of phone lines".

link
kaibee 1742 days ago
> Can you provide the legislative history that supports this?

No, I'm not a lawyer/historian.

> According to wikipedia airlines, cell phone companies, cruise ships, and shipping companies operate as common carriers, even though none of them are controlled by monopolies.

Airlines, cruise ships, and shipping companies, do not own the 'land' (in the georgist sense) that they traverse, so they're just completely irrelevant to the discussion.

As for cell phone companies, you may remember that a certain company known as AT&T was famously broken up into dozens of smaller companies (that have since re-congealed). Also those companies are legally required to interoperate with each other, ie: your T-Mobile phone will "roam" on AT&T's network.

> I'm not a libertarian, but I can still see the difference between "it would be really expensive to lay another set of phone lines" and "the state forbids you from laying another set of phone lines".

As far as I'm aware, the state, does not forbid anyone from laying another set of phone lines or railroad lines or roads, for the same reason that it doesn't forbid anyone from violating conservation of energy.

link
SV_BubbleTime 1742 days ago
> Was that because they got big, or was it because they were granted a government monopoly?

Got big.

But why would it matter? Govs suck at accountability, I wouldn’t expect that to factor in now.

link