Turning Facebook into a utility effectively turns it into something it isn’t: a government approved monopoly with special rights and privileges. Perversely Facebook then becomes another tool for people with actual power to abuse in their lawmaking capacity in ways they simply couldn’t now. If your goal is to defang Facebook, that’s probably not what you want.

You have a temporary problem socializing in some circumstances without Facebook, which is entirely solvable by you alone. Facebook is nowhere near a monopoly on its core functions, but certain groups, scenes or networks of people may choose to use it exclusively. You are being screwed over by their choices and blaming Facebook for it.

Also I don’t read Doctorow. No reason in particular, but if you want to cite him, cite him properly and bring his words here into the discussion.

> Perversely Facebook then becomes another tool for people with actual power to abuse in their lawmaking capacity in ways they simply couldn’t now.

This needs explanation.

If Facebook were forced to open their API, then it would be possible to not use their news feed. "Unfollow everyone" would then be the default. That in turn allows people to build on their "platform" without entertaining any of the "viral" stuff. In particular, everyone who uses FB because it's easy to organize "events" on it won't have to get snagged in all the toxic things that are going on. That is effectively defanging the danger that it currently poses to society.

At the end of the day, organizers are trying to organize. It is hard to ignore FB's reach in this manner. You cannot blame organizers for having to use FB. They are subject to market competition and may not have much of a choice in the platforms they use.

So if I’m understanding you correctly, you want to strip mine the valuable parts of Facebook’s business with government force?

Don’t take this the wrong way, but I’m not backing you on this. That’s neither a just nor good use of government power.

> This needs explanation.

An information platform as a utility citizens are assumed or expected to have under the thumb of bureaucrats is a valuable propaganda tool in the hands of any government.

This is a TERRIBLE idea. Turning Facebook into a government entity, (or even making an org to regulate it), is as anti-American as it is unconstitutional. Take away 230 protection status and if the company survives great, otherwise another one will take its place.

I don't care what you say, any person CAN live without Facebook. Yes it might be painful for some, but in a free market society, some company (most likely many disparate companies), will cover those needs.

So it's such a powerful monopoly that you don't use it? Imagine if some gas station was a monopoly, it would be much harder to stop that. I don't use facebook either but i simply message people or they message me if they want to do something.

How is Facebook a monopoly platform? Competitors like Twitter, Clubhouse and Signal have flourished under their incompetence. If our basis for a monopoly was "a captive audience" then Apple, Google, Amazon and Microsoft need to get dragged into this discussion, since they've been engaging in that kind of unfair business for decades longer than Facebook has.

> Except that FB is a monopoly platform that has become too important to ignore.

I haven't had a facebook since 2012 and there are exactly 0 things I've noticed missing out on because of it. This includes all 4 years of college and moving states multiple times during this timeframe.

LinkedIn feels far more essential to me unfortunately.