> who will be setting those limits

The same ones who set the limits on the railroads and oil tycoons, after they abused their power, or on AT&T, after it abused its power, et cetera. This is why we have government.

The situations you mention involve antitrust law and unfair competition, with the intent that consumers would benefit from increased competition. Internet companies are different, and specifically Facebook is different, because its customers are advertising companies and its product is the eyeballs of its users. Ironically, the closest contemporary internet analogy to your examples is Net Neutrality...

Any legislation around Facebook and similar is going to look fundamentally different than antitrust law. It's more likely to look like some sort of "consumer protection" suit rather than a monopoly takedown. I don't trust our lawmakers to successfully figure out the incentive structures; they'll likely seize this opportunity to appeal to their voter base. The results might not be what they intend.

Antitrust law, specifically the Sherman Antitrust Act, does not talk about customers as much as "protecting consumers" from "abuses", broadly defined. In my discussions in New York political circles, many see a Facebook antitrust case as a paved road to a Governorship.

> Sherman Antitrust Act

Broadly defined, in terms of economics. I don't see much discussion of Facebook with regards to "market competition". It's free to use, tough to argue that prices are being artificially inflated when there are none.

But I also don't doubt that antitrust suits are how legislators want to pursue action against Facebook.

EDIT: The justification I could see is that (1) advertising prices are being artificially inflated, which is tough given that many other tech companies compete for the same advertising dollars, and (2) that consumers aren't receiving fair compensation for their personal data, but even that doesn't seem like a good fit for anti-trust law.

> In my discussions in New York political circles, many see a Facebook antitrust case as a paved road to a Governorship

As a lifetime NYS and current NYC resident, I sure wont be basing my vote for governor on whether they take action against Facebook. I'd see it as an attempt to use the governor position as a stepping stone to federal government. This state has more pressing regional problems to deal with, in my opinion.

Exactly. Freedom is not just a set of laws, it's an attitude and a culture that can step back from popular convenient choices and avoid ones that concentrate power.

Crucially, individuals need to be willing to sacrifice something -- usually a moderate amount of money or safety -- or it's not ever going to work.

Or, increasingly, simple convenience

The government will, and we won't entirely know but it'll be better than it is right now.

Users are the only people who will be able to set limits on Facebook's power, and the only way to do that will be to form some kind of union to organize collective action. Feel like there's a learned helplessness effect, though, that has settled into people.