Read on Twitter
Social media is the new AT&T. Governments are now trying to impose regulations on them, to curb their powers. It wouldn't surprise me if they end up trying to break up their monopolies, now they realize centralized reputation systems impose direct threats to the nation state.
It took around 60 years from AT&T being granted their monopoly over the US telephone network by the federal gov until they reversed their stance and broke them up again. For social media it seem it has taken only a decade to go through a similar type of process.
Here's some speculation: I believe (religion, not science) that social media companies could actually prevent this by decentralizing (parts of) their back-ends. The dichotomy here is that their business models and shareholders probably don't allow for this.
The easiest way to convince shareholders of the necessity here might be the amount of moderators hired at large social media companies these days, and how their jobs could be automated by outsourcing it to the user.
Image source: https://medium.com/@2W/on-twitters-health-metric-4aa22094c431
Image source: https://medium.com/@2W/on-twitters-health-metric-4aa22094c431
Not only is it more cost-efficient for companies if they're no longer responsible for this, but it would also be more risk-efficient. And not only to the company, but to the user as well, since they would no longer have a third party to curate their timelines.
After all, curating our own personal networks is what we have done since we lived in tribes, and it's why most of us (probably) don't have many Russian misinformants, trolls, and/or sockpuppets in our own personal networks.
The other possible scenarios I see is:
1. People demanding more control over their own data and who they share it with;
2. A dystopic future with Sesame Credit like systems, but in the western world they'd be owned by companies like Google or Facebook.
1. People demanding more control over their own data and who they share it with;
2. A dystopic future with Sesame Credit like systems, but in the western world they'd be owned by companies like Google or Facebook.
That is, because in the west we change political parties but not policies, whereas, say, in China, they change policies but not parties. We (westerners) would be ruled by capitalistic influences from companies like Google and Facebook, whereas Chinese gov owns their companies.
You pick. Sesame credit, Google, or owning your own data. Those are pretty much your options until we repeat history and try to burn everything while it's already too late. The witnesses of history aren't around anymore to emphasize this, so allow me.
Seems like Canada is rolling with my theory. I don't even think regulation would help here, so I'll refrain from saying "Go Canada" on this one. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-jim-balsillie-urges-mps-to-regulate-surveillance-capitalism-of/
I'll shut up now. https://twitter.com/timpastoor/status/841003486594662401
