The Top 5 Reasons Why Some Governments Recommend Limiting the Giants of Technology

Under the rule of the Internet, some giants stand out: Facebook, with its other products (WhatsApp and Instagram), leads in the world of messaging and social networks; Google is king in research; Amazon, directs online shopping. They are born by offering a service or products, but over the years they have created new businesses.

Microsoft, for example, is now focusing on cloud services and Apple, in addition to the sale of computer equipment, stands out with services such as iCloud or Apple Pay and is expected to launch a new streaming platform.

Thanks to the growth of the public and the ability to know what each customer wants (thanks to an efficient data processing allowing them to customize their offers), many of these companies have ventured into new areas such as l & # 39; artificial intelligence or autonomous vehicles. .

By observing the digital ecosystem, it is clear that, more and more, power is concentrated in a few hands. And it is a problem that worries and occupies several governments and groups of different types.

Governments who want to put an end to the giants

In this sense, he proposed to implement new standards so that large technology companies do not concentrate several activities at the same time. In particular, it proposes to structurally separate the products generated by large companies from the virtual market (online stores) where they are offered.

For its part, a commission of experts appointed by the British government and led by Jason Furman, former economic advisor to the former President of the United States, Barack Obama, also raises the need to change the rules of the game.

And although this report does not propose a division of companies, it also seeks to regulate the growth and expansion of large companies such as Facebook, Google or Microsoft (among others of equal importance). In this sense, they suggest that this type of business share data with other companies and that they facilitate options so that users can switch providers or migrate their information to the competition. Everything to promote competition and diversity.

Versatile environments and their benefits

The NGO Internet Society, for its part, has published a report that also warns of the problem of Internet concentration in a few companies. The report speaks of "full service environments". This means that platforms provide a range of services from communications and entertainment to information, lifestyle services and productivity.

This, on the one hand, is positive for entrepreneurs. "A startup can buy processing capacity, for example, by acquiring services in the cloud of a large company like Amazon, which did not exist ten years ago, the capital investment that a start-up should have years ago in Computers would have been expensive, but not today, "says Sebastián Bellagamba, Regional Director of the Internet Society for Latin America and the Caribbean, in dialogue with Infobae.

Scalability is also what gives meaning to many platforms. A social network is valuable in itself and offers the possibility of communication to users because, precisely, it is composed of 1,000 million people, as is the case with Instagram, to name just one example. If I did not have this success, it would make no sense as a social network.

The reasons why we try to stop the excessive advance of the giants

1. Few incentives to compete

The problem is that these environments can also limit innovation, as many companies may feel uncomfortable with the competition in a market where they fear losing. Launching an online marketing site or social network today may seem like a losing battle from the outset. And that means therefore fewer options for the user.

2. The lack of interoperability

Another problem detailed in the report is the lack of interoperability, which means that platforms "do not talk to each other" and that, therefore, we can not talk about WhatsApp to Telegram, for example.

3. Unclear conditions of use

"You must also badyze the way in which the exchanges take place on the platforms, you give information in exchange for a service, there are conditions of use that are exposed and public but that are not quite clear to everyone, they get to understand the terms and conditions, "says Bellagamba.

The fact that very few people dominate the situation makes it more difficult to regulate this and other issues. Because, along with the growth of the audience and the income, the power takes various forms. It is therefore necessary to establish clearer and more equitable rules for all.

The increasingly widespread use of APIs on large platforms means that the functionality and interoperability of the Internet are in the hands of very powerful ecosystems, whose interests may only not match those of others, as the report points out.

The major Internet providers, who are often also large platforms, are in favorable conditions to master the new era of the Internet of Things and advanced computing. This promotes the dependence of many actors in these large companies.

The development of new applications or new businesses depends more and more on platforms belonging to a few companies.

"Capability and innovation must be preserved, so the Internet is a wonderful technology if Internet APIs and protocols are used freely." The theme is that the disproportionate size of companies reduces the incentives to create new ones in models that they compete with, "concludes Bellagamba.