> and added an API to interact with the new platform.
Except that there isn't an API for the new platform. Not one that allows interaction even by a client that is willing to code specifically to a proprietary API.
I don't think forcing companies to use a specific api (e.g. XMPP) is a good idea. But forcing them to expose functionality over a stable, documented, versioned API probably is.
Maybe it doesn't do what you want it to (personal use 3rd party client?), but again, we get back to exactly what the reality was back when XMPP was around...
Literally no one was ever able to even come close to leveraging XMPP to counter Facebook's network effect. And the vast majority of interactions happened by clicking the little message icon in a Facebook property.
Like even officially recommending companies do so, I would not have a problem with.
But to me it's simple, a punishment should be at least somewhat proportional to the damage + some punitive multiplier.
The damage of not having something like XMPP is nearly 0. You multiply it and it should still be nearly 0.
-
More than that, again, has a terrible smell of not actually about being the stated goal, but rather trying to ride the wave of an industry you fell behind in.
And to that I say, catch up instead. People come up with all sorts of excuses... China sure is competing. Even India is competing locally with outsiders.
Europe simply has not made comparable the investments or efforts to other parts of the world to throw in the towel and claim "big bad FAANG can never be out competed unless we kneecap them"
Except that there isn't an API for the new platform. Not one that allows interaction even by a client that is willing to code specifically to a proprietary API.
I don't think forcing companies to use a specific api (e.g. XMPP) is a good idea. But forcing them to expose functionality over a stable, documented, versioned API probably is.