diff --git a/content/posts/eu-dma-interoperability.en.md b/content/posts/eu-dma-interoperability.en.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..67d39c5 --- /dev/null +++ b/content/posts/eu-dma-interoperability.en.md @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ +--- +title: "Interoperability in a “Big Tech” world" +date: 2022-04-04T12:00:00+01:00 +translationKey: 'eu-dma-interoperability' +tags: [XMPP, Regulations, Free Market, Capitalism] +--- + + +As an answer to the [announce of the EU parliament][0] to force some service +providers to allow others to interact with them, that we call +"interoperability". + +[0]: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20220315IPR25504/deal-on-digital-markets-act-ensuring-fair-competition-and-more-choice-for-users + +# Interoperability + +In theory, interoperability is a way to allow different networks to +communicate together. And it's great, it's even important for emancipation, +empowerment of users. + +I still have concerns though because I think in general it makes user +experience (UX) more complex, and even screws up the various efforts +applications make in this domain[^1]. + +This law says it's going to force big companies (Facebook, Apple, etc.) that +it calls "gatekeepers" to open their services to other networks. + +In practice these networks will be accessible via *bridges*. A bridge is the +software layer that handles the connection between different networks. It +understands the language (protocol) that these applications speak, and +translates from one to the other. + +These bridges already exist for various open, and proprietary protocols like +WhatsApp. A problem is that it is in WhatsApp's interest to ensure their users +don't use any other applications than the ones they provide. As soon as +WhatsApp realizes that a bridge works, they will quickly change something in +their software to ensure it doesn't anymore, and may also ban accounts that +were using the bridges, etc. + +[^1]: *TODO: expand on this in another article* + +# Power struggle + +What implications are there from small networks' perspective? And as it would +also impact users if it's not beneficial for networks, what implications are +there for the users? + +How will these platforms now handle questions of identity at their doors? +Usually they would ask a phone number, an ID card and whatnot. + +Now that they don't have control over the whole network, will users have to +register credentials with the bridge to communicate? Often that's used as an +excuse to protect themselves from spam, and it may indeed, but it also has +various harmful effects on users. + +It's not because the law now says that they have to allow interoperability +that they will magically adopt good practices[^2]. They are still sharks and +will still be in position of strengh over other players on the network. + +[^2]: The phrase "good practices" is to be defined obviously, by a collective + discussion between equals, not out of a unilateral decision. + +With their important userbase these platforms would be able to impose certain +practices to all who want to communicate with them. It's already been the case +when Google (gtalk), Facebook, and Microsoft were using XMPP, and it's +possible to observe this behaviour also in email with Google (gmail) and +Microsoft. + +In summary, pretence of debate during standardization -- if it even happens -- +caused by this position of strengh. + +# A power struggle already here? + +Some say this power struggle already exists, and it's true. To what extent do +these companies influence our protocols and applications already? I wouldn't +know. + +I would say many features and UX come from them. Because of their huge +userbase, lots of us active in the XMPP community tell ourselves we need to at +least be able to equal them to be as attractive, and that's how it gets in the +protocol. + +By forcing these companies to open up -- which will also be turned upside down +as a marketing strategy to show their goodness by the way -- won't this +influence grow even more in our spheres? To what extent? + +In email for example, if you've had the chance to host your own server, you +certainly have had to cross swords with gmail.com, very influent in this area, +where a good chunk of your contacts are hosted. + +Google easily abuses its position of strengh to impose various anti-spam +measures, and other practices which they pulled out of their magic hat (they +might have asked their friends over at Microsoft and co). And if one day they +wish to stop communicating with you, meaning you lose access to your contacts, +you have no say in it. + +To clarify the use of the word "force": These regulations aren't in the +interest of the companies we're talking about. Let me remind you as I've said +above that as we speak they actively try to prevent any "unsanctioned" +implementation to use their platforms. + +That's why it is generally complex and time-consuming to maintain a bridge. +They will actively fight you and you will need to update your code again and +again. Another example would be NewPipe and Youtube on Android. + +# In summary + +One can imagine the bare minimum will be done to comply with the law -- after +a horde of lobbyists has gone over it again and again, to weaken it even more. + +Forcing interoperability is only a question of form, and not of substance. The +problem still is capitalism, accumulation of wealth and power, and monopolies +and oppressions that these create. + +It's certainly pessimistic, but I doubt forcing these monopolies to +communicate with other entities allow the free XMPP community to oppose their +ideas and provoke substancial changes within these services, and I'm +picturing the opposite rather. + +Down with capitalism! Down with oppressions! diff --git a/content/posts/eu-dma-interoperability.fr.md b/content/posts/eu-dma-interoperability.fr.md index 747d691..971103b 100644 --- a/content/posts/eu-dma-interoperability.fr.md +++ b/content/posts/eu-dma-interoperability.fr.md @@ -5,8 +5,6 @@ translationKey: 'eu-dma-interoperability' tags: [XMPP, Regulations, Free Market, Capitalism] --- -*English translation coming soon™.* - En réaction à l'[annonce du parlement européen][0] de forcer certains fournisseurs de services à permettre à d'autres plus petits d'intéragir, qu'on appelle ici « interopérabilité ».