[cbradford]

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...

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

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.

[gruez]

>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?

[kaibee]

> 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.

[SV_BubbleTime]

> 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.