I find it interesting that we're reasoning in terms of balance of power, pre-eminence, and hegemony, to address issues related to a few companies. Cardinal de Richelieu sure would have found his footing.
No wonder some Google had a "Head of International Relations" whose job is to deal with diplomats, the U.N and the like[^1]. I believe Condoleezza Rice is also on the board of Dropbox.
[^1]: https://medium.com/@rossformaine/i-was-googles-head-of-inter...
Perhaps all this familiarity is finally breeding contempt from certain quarters? Perhaps it’s a bit of envy on both sides; nations envious of multinational profits and reach, and multinational firms envious of national self-justifying existence.
I wonder how long til Starlink starts providing extraterritorial/extraterrestrial VPS?
Exactly. My concern is that Google is being uniquely targeted, and that breaking them up and calling it a day just exposes us to further abuses from the rest of the tech industry. At least with Google, evil is divided across five tech giants that can serve as checks against one another, instead of merely four.
Similarly, I feel that the tech industry as a whole, while far from not evil, has emerged with a set of interests distinct from those of other monopolies, and helped protect the internet from being subordinated to the interests of telecoms. Which isn't to say that I enjoy monopolies, far from it. I just want to see similar willpower to break up the giants of other industries.
For that matter, if we really have to go the route of the uniquely targeting a specific tech company, I would at least start with Amazon and then Facebook. Or if we thought more broadly than just tech, I would start with the oil industry giants, finance industry giants, and then telecoms, and then health insurance companies, and then Amazon and Facebook.