Ending WP and FB monopolies

As I wonder what can be done about the messes we humans keep suffering rather than fixing them, occasionally I have an idea that others don’t seem to have thought about. Here’s one.

Centralization of power grows as unequal power structures are accepted and tolerated. Though we use “monopoly” to describe them, monopoly presumes that power only involves a market with money exchanges. I’m skeptical that “antitrust” can deal with the problems we see with Facebook and Wikipedia (and Google, too, but I’ll lay off them for today). E.g. Facebook is only a monopolist in the “advertising services” market, technically. The fact that it dominates social media interaction isn’t a matter of economics for the exploitation of its users. It is a matter of power – control of communications among users.

Perhaps I’ll be posting more frequently here, ideas that I hope others might pursue regarding preventing Climate Disaster, Privacy as a technological goal to be provided, sharing the “wireless medium” (not Spectrum, never Spectrum). It’s a way to memorialize stuff I’d normally just babble about…

2 comments

  1. I’m curious what your thoughts are about attempts dating back at least to Julian Huxley and Teilhard de Chardin to catalyze a new phase of evolution through collective consciousness – Christogenesis / Omega Point – how network collectivism on blockchain (stigmergy-swarm intelligence) will advance such a program? It seems to me that the John Temple Foundation (Free Markets, Religion, Theoretical Physics Grants) and the Fetzer Institute are pouring lots of money into this – a sort of moral markets deployment to get at a hivemend consciousness via ubiquitous computing. Do you feel any responsibility for advancing such a cause via your equation?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Yres-LF9VE
    https://kumu.io/Timpsila/d-cent#untitled-map/reeds-law-david-reed-exponential-value-creation-from-group-forming-networks-transactional-architecture

  2. I don’t feel any responsibility for advancing those causes advocating “collective consciousness”. The promoters of such causes are free to use platforms that support group formation if they wish.

    I just don’t find “moral markets” as a useful project. Markets are just markets – what happens when participants trade, under a set of rules. There’s no core meaning of “free markets” as a term. People already have invented a terribly flawed idea of “property rights” that seems to be assumed as a given in the discourse about Free Markets. Many would suggest that Property Rights are a major antithesis of Freedom.
    I also question why hivemind consciousness would be a desirable future – besides emulating some science fiction imaginings, who benefits?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.