Post #1385013

2022-12-19 18:47 UTC

@michaelchampion @cdub @danbri So, to conclude: looking at only one G thing (I could repeat this for a couple of other aspects) and taking the most G-friendly assumptions (no malice, product quality, natural monopoly) I still find issues with G behaviour/market structuring that are (IMHO) significant harms to the Web and society. I think it should be W3C's job to solve the Web's most pressing structural problems, and this is one of them.

Replies (2)

@robin@mastodon.social 2022-12-19 18:52

@michaelchampion @cdub @danbri That does NOT mean that Googlers are evil, that G needs to be eliminated, that there is some evil plan, that G is controlling W3C, etc. Again, I'd *much* rather solve this with than to. It's not the first time that we have a runaway giant that needs to be kept in check. I don't think it's outrageous, unsubtle, radical, or disrespectful to point that out as one of the biggest and hardest problems that we need to solve.

Open ##1385015
@michaelchampion@indieweb.social 2022-12-19 20:29

@robin @cdub @danbri Agree with your first paragraph! I wish W3C was organizationally capable of solving the web's structural problems, but since those who benefit from the problems (not just Google!) can block consensus, I don't see how that can happen. We can't even agree that W3C should only charter work that is aligned with W3C's purported mission and values, and many are uncomfortable even admitting that the web platform has created many new problems as it solved old ones.🤷🏽‍♂️.

Open ##1385016