[roenxi]

There is an interesting argument here against the idea that YouTube, Facebook, etc are monopolies despite their impressive market share. The moment they try to extract value from their users, they have to shrink their own mote - a competitor can copy the older version of the platform that extracted less money.

They don't actually have much choice in how they run their products.

[paulryanrogers]

So if a dictator's hold on power is weak, is it not a dictatorship? Imagine there have been 2 coups over 15 years, yet both produced a winner-takes-nearly-all outcome.

Not sure it matters much if you're at the bottom and have to bow to one for a while then the other.

[roenxi]

Put it this way; your comment could be a veiled description of US politics. The typical democracy simulates a coup every 2-5 years in a winner-takes-all contest. If if you're at the bottom and have to bow to one party for a while then the other. Indeed, the description is so apt that everyone ritualistically accuses their political opponents of actually fomenting a coup (powered by Russia/China/Israel/Bill Gates/mobilising dead people/gerrymandering/the electoral college being illegitimate/whatever).

So yes, I do actually believe that. If the hold on power is weak enough it doesn't count as a dictatorship.

[paulryanrogers]

The difference is an effective balance of power between branches of a government. Dictators have unchecked power (at least in practice) until they're deposed.

Similarly many of today's tech giants are difficult to escape, especially as network effects drive toward centralization of power.