如何“驯服”科技巨头？How to tame the tech titans?
.jpg "谷歌,脸谱网,亚马逊,科技巨头")
Facebook and Amazon are increasingly dominant. How should they be controlled?
脸谱网，亚马逊发展日益强大，政府该如何管理这些科技巨头？
脸谱网，亚马逊发展日益强大，政府该如何管理这些科技巨头？
NOT long ago, being the boss of a big Western tech firm was a dream job. As the billions rolled in, so did the plaudits: Google, Facebook, Amazon and others were making the world a better place. Today these companies are accused of being BAADD—big, anti-competitive, addictive and destructive to democracy. Regulators fine them, politicians grill them and one-time backers warn of their power to cause harm.
不久前，在西方国家，许多人还梦想成为大型科技公司的管理者，随着大量资本涌入，这个行业不断受到人们的追捧。谷歌（Google），脸谱网（Facebook）和亚马逊（Amazon）等科技公司让世界变得更美好，但是如今这些公司却因规模巨大，反竞争行为，破坏民主而备受指责。监管部门对这些公司进行罚款，政客们不断责问这些公司，那些曾经的支持者们则发出警告，称这些公司一手遮天可能会对社会造成危害。
Much of this tech lash is misguided. But big tech platforms, particularly Facebook, Google and Amazon, do indeed raise a worry about fair competition. That is partly because they often benefit from legal exemptions. Unlike publishers, Facebook and Google are rarely held responsible for what users do on them; and for years most American buyers on Amazon did not pay sales tax.
大多数批评的声音具有误导性，但是像脸谱网，谷歌，亚马逊等科技公司在市场公平竞争方面的行为确实让人担忧。部分原因是这些公司受益于法定的免税制度。与出版商不同，脸书和谷歌几乎不用为其用户的言行负责。一直以来，大多数美国消费者在亚马逊上购买的物品都不用缴纳消费税。
Nor do the titans simply compete in a market. Increasingly, they are the market itself, providing the infrastructure (or “platforms”) for much of the digital economy. Many of their services appear to be free, but users “pay” for them by giving away their data. Powerful though they already are, their huge stock market valuations suggest that investors are counting on them to double or even triple in size in the next decade.
此外，这些科技巨头不用争夺同一片市场，渐渐地，这些公司就成为市场本身，为数字经济提供基础设施（亦或“平台”），他们提供的大多数服务看起来是免费的，但是用户却在享受服务时泄露了自己的信息，虽然这些科技公司本身已经发展壮大，市值很高，但是从它们的股市估值来看，投资者们仍然希望其规模能在未来十年内增长两倍甚至三倍。
The less severe contest
市场竞争程度减弱
The platforms have become so dominant because they benefit from “network effects”. Size begets size: the more sellers Amazon, say, can attract, the more buyers will shop there, which attracts more sellers, and so on. By some estimates, Amazon captures over 40% of online shopping in America. With more than 2bn monthly users, Facebook holds sway over the media industry. Firms cannot do without Google, which in some countries processes more than 90% of web searches. Facebook and Google control two-thirds of America’s online ad revenues.
这些科技公司受益于“网络效应”，在各自领域占据统治地位，因此它们的规模越来越大。在亚马逊网站上入驻的商家越多，这样就能吸引更多的消费者，更多的消费者就能吸引更多的商家，据估计，美国40%以上的网上购物在亚马逊网站上完成；脸书的月用户量超过20亿，称霸传媒业；公司企业都离不开谷歌，在一些国家，谷歌的搜索量占总搜索量的90%以上，此外，仅脸谱网和谷歌两家公司就占据美国线上广告收入的三分之二。
If this trend runs its course, consumers will suffer as the tech industry becomes less vibrant. Less money will go into startups, most good ideas will be bought up by the titans and, one way or another, the profits will be captured by the giants
如果这种趋势继续下去，随着科技产业活力减弱，消费者的利益将会受到损害。流入新兴网络公司的资金将变少，新鲜有创意的想法也会被那些科技巨头所收买，最终那些大型公司将赚取所有利润。
The early signs are already visible. The European Commission has accused Google of using control of Android, its mobile operating system, to give its own apps a leg up. Facebook keeps buying firms which could one day lure users away: first Instagram, then WhatsApp and most recently tbh, an app that lets teenagers send each other compliments anonymously. Although Amazon is still increasing competition in aggregate, as industries from groceries to television can attest, it can also spot rivals and squeeze them from the market.
一些早期迹象已经显而易见，欧盟委员会(European Commission)指控谷歌为了给本公司的应用软件提供支持而控制安卓这一移动操作系统。脸谱网一直在收购新兴网络公司，因为未来这些公司有可能会吸引大量用户，脸谱网首先收购了图片分享（Instagram），然后是网络信使（WhatsApp），还有最近的tbh，这款应用可以让青少年们互相发匿名问候消息。尽管亚马逊的总体竞争力仍在增长，它不仅售卖各种食品杂货，而且还出售电视机等家电用品，但是现在亚马逊也在不断寻找潜在的竞争对手，并将这些公司从市场中排挤出来。
The rivalry remedy
对抗措施
The first is to make better use of existing competition law. Trustbusters should scrutinise mergers to gauge whether a deal is likely to neutralise a potential long-term threat, even if the target is small at the time. Such scrutiny might have prevented Facebook’s acquisition of Instagram and Google’s of Waze, which makes navigation software. To ensure that the platforms do not favour their own products, oversight groups could be set up to deliberate on complaints from rivals.
首先，政府可以更好地利用现有的竞争法。反垄断官员应该仔细审查企业的并购行为，检查企业的收购协议是否会消除一个潜在的长期竞争对手,即使当时的被并购对象规模较小。政府这样的审查原本可以阻止脸谱网收购图片分享（Instagram），和谷歌收购导航软件社交地图（Waze）。为了确保这些平台不偏袒自己的产品，政府应该设立一个监管组织，来接受其他竞争公司的意见和控诉。
Second, trustbusters need to think afresh about how tech markets work. A central insight, one increasingly discussed among economists and regulators, is that personal data are the currency in which customers actually buy services. Through that prism, the tech titans receive valuable information—on their users’ behaviour, friends and purchasing habits—in return for their products. Just as America drew up sophisticated rules about intellectual property in the 19th century, so it needs a new set of laws to govern the ownership and exchange of data, with the aim of giving solid rights to individuals.
其次，反垄断官员需要重新思考科技市场的运作方式。经济学家和监管机构日益讨论的一个核心观点是：个人信息实际上是客户用来购买服务的货币。通过这一方式，科技巨头们获得了宝贵的信息，即用户的行动轨迹、朋友和购买习惯，用户交出这些信息才能免费使用产品。正如美国在19世纪制定了复杂的法律用来保护知识产权，如今政府也应该制定一套新的法律来管理个人信息的所有权和交流权，将处置这些信息的权利交给个人。
None of this will be simple, but it would tame the titans without wrecking the gains they have brought. Users would find it easier to switch between services. Upstart competitors would have access to some of the data that larger firms hold and thus be better equipped to grow to maturity without being gobbled up.
所有的这些措施实施起来都不那么简单，但是只有这些措施才能让政府既管理好科技巨头，又不会毁掉它们带来的益处。用户会发现在不同服务之间切换时更加容易。那些新崛起的竞争对手也将会获得一些大公司持有的数据，这样这些新兴公司才能更好地发展壮大而不会被吞并。
Titan：巨人，巨子；成就非凡的人
Tame：驯化；驯服；使易于控制
Roll in：（金钱）等大量涌进
Plaudits: 鼓掌，喝彩
Grill：盘问，追问，责问
Lash：怒斥；严责
Exemption：免税；免除
Count on：依赖，依靠，指望
Startup：新兴公司（尤指新兴网络公司）
Anonymously：匿名地
Scrutinise：彻底检查
Neutralise：抵消，中和，使…无效
Trustbuster：反垄断官员
Wreck：破坏，毁坏
编译：Vivian
（编辑:Edward）
京公网安备11010802022018号