A social network is a natural monopoly due to the network effect. It wouldn't make any sense to split it up. Regulating it like any other natural monopoly could make sense.
Amazon is certainly not an online shopping monopoly. It's just a superior service. I can get a similar online shopping experience from Wal Mart and many others. If Amazon can offer us such good service through having its own big network of warehouses, drivers, etc. that's impossible with a bunch of smaller companies then I say let them be as big as they are so long as they don't egregiously abuse it.
> A social network is a natural monopoly due to the network effect. It wouldn't make any sense to split it up.
This isn’t entirely accurate. Federated social networking is entirely feasible, and arguably the only reason it isn’t more widespread is because large non-federated social networks have an active interest in not federating.
Breaking up Facebook would make it possible for social-network “hub operators” to compete on the basis of moderation quality, administrative practices, and site quality.
> A social network is a natural monopoly due to the network effect. It wouldn't make any sense to split it up. Regulating it like any other natural monopoly could make sense.
They definitely need to take Whatsapp away from Facebook, though. Regulators only allowed it under specific conditions and Facebook violated those conditions
Amazon is certainly not an online shopping monopoly. It's just a superior service. I can get a similar online shopping experience from Wal Mart and many others. If Amazon can offer us such good service through having its own big network of warehouses, drivers, etc. that's impossible with a bunch of smaller companies then I say let them be as big as they are so long as they don't egregiously abuse it.