How did the biggest tech companies end up with virtually no competition?

最大的科技公司如何擺脫競爭者、成為獨大？

Well, all of the big tech companies are in incredibly fierce competition with each other.

這麼說吧，其實所有的大科技公司都是彼此強烈的競爭對手。

But I think what's made it difficult for smaller companies to keep up with them is they have such huge audiences that the scale advantages keep attracting to the same few companies.

但我想，小間的公司之所以難以和他們相抗衡，是因為那些公司的受眾群實在太廣，數量上的優勢讓他們吸引來同性質的公司。

They benefit from network effects, so that means if I'm on now with 10 friends, it's not great.

他們受益於網路效應，意思是「假使我現在有十個朋友，那並不好。」

But if I have all my friends on that one platform, that's brilliant.

但我若是在一個平台上有許許多多朋友，那就太棒了。

So it tends to be that people flood towards one particular platform.

重點就是：要有一群人聚集到某個特定的平台。

One of the ways in which the tech companies ended up with virtually no competition is by literally buying out the competition.

科技公司一枝獨秀有一個辦法是，將競爭對手收歸旗下。

So take Facebook, for instance.

拿臉書做個例子。

They bought up Instagram and WhatsApp both very early on in their lifetime.

他們在早期就買下了 Instagram 和 WhatsApp。

Because they were looking out for apps that were quickly gathering new users and whom they could see in the horizon as picking up the next big trend.

因為他們在尋找那些快速吸引新用戶的應用程式，那些未來勢必成為趨勢的應用程式。

Now, WhatsApp still doesn't make any money.

現在 WhatsApp 仍然沒帶來任何收益。

It never had a business model, but yet it was worth $19 billion dollars to Facebook.

它從來沒有一個商業模式，但對臉書來說它還是價值 190 億美金。

There are plenty of investors on the west coast of the US that think monopolies are great and they're something to aspire to, rather than something to knock down.

美國西岸的許多投資人都認為「壟斷」是好的、值得追求，無需拆臺。

The main problem with antitrust law, as it stands at the moment, is that it tends to look in the US at prices as the main gauge of whether consumers are benefiting.

目前看來，反壟斷法的主要問題是，它將售價視為消費者是否受益的主要量表。

And so many of these internet services are given away for free, that it looks as though consumers are benefiting hugely.

所以有許多線上服務都是免費提供的，乍看之下消費者獲益良多。

But there are people that are now trying to redefine cost in terms of not just dollars, but data or how the actions of the biggest companies are affecting smaller competitors.

不過現在有人試著用「資料」或是「大公司的決策如何影響小企業」重新定義「花費」，而不只專注於「錢」本身。

But the other way in which I think they've grown to such scale is the sort of Silicon Valley mentality, this "growth at all costs" culture.

不過我想他們之所以規模龐大還有個原因是所謂的「矽谷思想」，也就是「為了擴展，不擇手段」的文化。

So Facebook, for example, its old slogan used to be "move fast break things".

舉例來說，臉書過往的標語是「快速行動、打破陳規」。

They were really looking to keep people on the platforms as long as possible, regardless of users' mental health or the fact that there might be false information on the platform.

他們竭盡所能留住平台上的用戶，至於用戶的心理健康和平台上是否有假消息散佈則是其次。

They just wanted to grow.

他們的目標就是擴展規模。