zlacker

[parent] [thread] 11 comments
1. ryanbr+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-02-08 13:47:50
What's stopping the next Google from doing the same? Providing poor justification for bans and removal from platforms is by no means limited to the big companies - it's endemic throughout tech - we just hear about Google and Facebook more because they're higher visibility and are considered more essential.
replies(2): >>zitter+v2 >>geofft+A6
2. zitter+v2[view] [source] 2021-02-08 14:00:08
>>ryanbr+(OP)
Dropping Google / Facebook is not just signing up with another service. You could self host your own email and just quit Facebook entirely.
replies(3): >>falcol+hb >>newswa+Db >>whimsi+Zr
3. geofft+A6[view] [source] 2021-02-08 14:20:28
>>ryanbr+(OP)
Antitrust regulation.

Seriously, the only reason Google is unaccountable is its scale. Otherwise "Google but with customer support" would be an obvious market opportunity. And the only reason losing your Google account is so impactful is that it controls everything from access to apps on your phone to your email to your calendar to being able to chat with friends. It's theoretically possible to vote with your wallet against Google, but far harder than against, say, Chick-fil-A, which means no boycott gets further than an HN comment.

No startup can compete with Google for those services because Google can artificially offer them for free, and for very high quality, because it's all funded by their advertising business. (Not to mention that a startup would have to "do things that don't scale" and offer real customer support... which also costs money.)

It's not a fair market at that point - you can't say Google is surviving because they offer the best value to customers, simply because the value is so disconnected from the service being offered. And in the other direction, potential customers like me who mostly avoid Google are still "paying" for it in that we're still seeing (and being tracked by) Google ads.

Every incentive mechanism behind the underlying assumptions of a market-based economy - that companies that provide more value are more likely to succeed in the market - is completely broken when you allow trusts like Alphabet to exist.

◧◩
4. falcol+hb[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-08 14:40:14
>>zitter+v2
> You could self host your own email

You can. I might be able to (there’s a lot of crap around spam filtering and SPF that I’d have to fight with).

My mother, father, sister, cousins, nieces and nephews? Not a chance in hell.

replies(1): >>FlownS+Xe
◧◩
5. newswa+Db[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-08 14:41:56
>>zitter+v2
That is a very, very limited scope for Google/Facebook. Almost to the point of me suspecting you are strawmanning it. In fact, google/facebook is so endemic to our infrastructure that you can literally delete you google account. Get it scrubbed from the internet, they will still track you. Identify you. And show you ads. If you try to block their services, some pages stop functioning. It is on the verge of impossible to escape them
◧◩◪
6. FlownS+Xe[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-08 14:55:43
>>falcol+hb
The only people who recommend self-hosting email are ones that haven't tried it.

We have an admin who spends a good 40% of his workweek doing just our email servers. They are a massive PITA.

replies(2): >>gowld+hn >>ryandr+GZ
◧◩◪◨
7. gowld+hn[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-08 15:29:09
>>FlownS+Xe
No, also people who host themselves and enjoy the hobby time and don't understand how the general public lives.
replies(1): >>FlownS+nE
◧◩
8. whimsi+Zr[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-08 15:49:57
>>zitter+v2
OK, you can lead your "resistance" to big tech your way.

Meanwhile, I'll be pushing my representative for regulatory action.

◧◩◪◨⬒
9. FlownS+nE[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-08 16:43:34
>>gowld+hn
I'm one of those people, generally, but even I'm not signing up to host an email server. Screw that.
◧◩◪◨
10. ryandr+GZ[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-08 18:27:37
>>FlownS+Xe
I have self-hosted E-mail for myself and my family for years, probably close to a decade now--I lost count. It's a learning curve at first but once it's dialed in and working, there's really nothing to touch. Occasionally, like once every two years or so, I find my spam filter process crashed and failed to relaunch or something, causing delivery delays.
replies(1): >>gorbac+F71
◧◩◪◨⬒
11. gorbac+F71[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-08 19:06:14
>>ryandr+GZ
"...but once it's dialed in and working, there's really nothing to touch"

...until your upstream changes something.

replies(1): >>falcol+Zd1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
12. falcol+Zd1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-08 19:36:13
>>gorbac+F71
Or an opaque third party (i.e. a spam list) puts you on their lists.
[go to top]