Interesting thought that's popped into my head since lemmy's population blew up.
These services are essentially individual sellers that all come together on a centralised platform provided by these sites to perform these services.
Aside from the logistics and distribution I see little reason why they can't be federated. Ebay could definitely be federated since individual sellers handle their own delivery, there is no ebay warehouse as far as I'm awar. Amazon on the other hand hold stock in warehouses making this considerably more difficult.
Interesting.
I would normally fall back on using the already "centralized" structure of the assets and management of the corporation... but who says that the Soviet model is the only viable "socialism"? It isn't and we know this.
Hell, I would encourage people to think of socialism outside of what we see in China now and the Soviet Union back then.
Right? When you take Amazon's warehouses and distribution out of the equation, something that we know works anyway because people sell and deliver products without amazon, essentially these marketplaces are just software. Why can't they be open source and decentralised federations?
Why should socialists consider this? Because I think it would disempower large centralised market power and re-empower small traders who would be incentivised into organising into unions and coalitions among themselves to hold more power in the market. They wouldn't be on the side of proletarians of course (sole traders and artisans might be) but their activity would spice things up, causing all kinds of headaches for the state and creating friction is useful. It would look a lot like the organising among smaller traders in India that has so far successfully kept Amazon from taking market share in the country.
Not entirely related to this post but your comment just reminded me of this excellent video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBFvxkvpi2w