Archived version: https://archive.ph/hh0wg
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20231030213952/https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-67226394
Archived version: https://archive.ph/hh0wg
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20231030213952/https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-67226394
I would say it is.
Just take a look at gaming from a far. Almost 50% of studios are partially or fully owned by one company - Tencent. Then you have a few smaller scale monopolies that focus on their own niches. Microsoft with their major consolidation happening right now and merging PC and console, SONY with their consoles and Nintendo with their handheld exclusives.
App stores are monopolies themselves. If you want to get those sales, you have to fit in the frame mandated to you by either Google or Apple.
People use dating apps? Can’t comment here, not familiar with it.
There is no paid platform that has even a fraction of users that a free platform does. And that’s by design, because once you have a user base you can always monetize it in 100 different ways and get 100x revenue over time than slowly building users that need to pay to try your platform.
Well I guess I should say I don’t disagree about the monopoly part. That’s definitely a thing with capitalism, but thats also the system failing us as they should be being prevented. You could also say it being broken and failing us is a feature of capitalism, but I’d probably disagree on that one.
It’s absurd that they let Microsoft buy Activision-Blizzard, but it’s going to keep happening.
I don’t know if you watch Upload, but they nailed it with “Oscar Mayer intel”
But I don’t think ads are specifically related to the monopoly problem. It’s a thing, ads, or no ads.