131
Signal president Meredith Whittaker says they had no choice but to use AWS, and that's a problem
(www.theregister.com)
A community for high quality news and discussion around technological advancements and changes
Things that fit:
Things that don't fit
The only solution for this is strong government regulation. Monopolies are the natural result from capitalism.
Is this even the solution in this case? These are truly global companies which begs the obvious question: Which government?
Which single government is incorruptible? Two or more you say? All governments maybe? What happens when regulatory rules are dissimilar? Lowest common denominator then perhaps? Would the Taliban-led Afghan government be able to weigh in and block resources showing women working if that was their want?
The most practical solution is something similar to particular features of GDPR - where greater scale / marketshare increase the responsibilities the company has, like increased requirements to support competitors (API compatibility, infrastructure access, etc) and prohibition against anticompetitive behaviors.
I had thought about that possibility too. In this would be a "lowest common denominator" method. Meaning the most restrictive law, in all regions that the services serve, would have to be followed by the global service companies. If we're just talking about USA and EU regulations it can look potentially better, but do we just stop with those two regulatory bodies? What if China wants to have a say, and we can guess what some of their laws would impose?