• d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    97
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Over-reliance on proprietary, closed-source products and services from megacorporations.

    For instance, it’s really absurd that people in many parts of the world cannot function without WhatsApp, they can’t even imagine a life without it. It seems absurd that Meta literally has them by the balls, and these people can’t do anything about it.

    Also the people who base their entire careers on say Adobe or Microsoft products, they’re literally having their lives dictated by one giant corporation, which is very depressing and dystopian.

    • wahming@monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It seems absurd that Meta literally has them by the balls, and these people can’t do anything about it.

      I don’t get this sentiment. If anything happens to WhatsApp, they’ll just switch to another IM. WhatsApp wasn’t the first to come along, and won’t be the last. How exactly does Meta have them by the balls?

      • d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        In some of those countries, it’s not really a choice. Like, WhatsApp is the only way of contacting a company’s customer care (via chat bots that run on it), colleges and universities may have study groups on it and teachers may hand out notes etc in those groups, also apparently it’s also the only way to contact even some government agencies.

        • wahming@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I know, I’m from those countries. Like I said, we used other IM apps before WhatsApp came along, and if something changes we can use a new app. WhatsApp currently leads the market due to the network effect, but it doesn’t have us ‘by the balls’.

          (Though the most likely successor would be WeChat, which is arguably much much worse in many ways)

      • PlexSheep@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        So many people use it, that the barrier to change to another application is high. They would need to fuck up on very large scale.

        • wahming@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yes, they currently have the market share, and network effect keeps them there. Nevertheless, my point was it’s not a monopoly, so how does Meta have everybody 'by the balls"?

      • DJDarren@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I remember listening to a podcast that talked of how in the Philippines (I think it was), Facebook is the internet, because Meta/FB effectively subsidised the carriers into allowing FB access to not use up any data allowance. As a result, if all you do is go on FB, you don’t pay a penny. If WhatsApp is included in this, then yeah, you’re locked in with no real alternative.

        • wahming@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh right. Not quite nowadays, they get subsidised from multiple companies, including Google (YouTube) and such. I hate to say this, but WeChat would probably be happy to jump in and grab some market share if Meta does something egregiously dumb

      • bagend [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        At least WeChat is firmly under the state’s thumb. It’s basically a public service at this point. They should just nationalize it.

    • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Talk to some older folks about what it was like when there was only one phone company and the alternative was snail mail.

      • duderium [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is an issue with the bourgeois character of American society and government. Monopolies are not a problem if workers control them.