That was a pretty good read. The author makes quite a few claims that hold up.

He mostly dismissed vertical integration, though, which is a big reason why big tech companies like Google have become so powerful. For example, if you wanted watch a video, you would probably go to YouTube, which is owned by Google, and to get to YouTube you would probably search for it on Google, on Chrome, a browser owned by Google.

While his proposals definitely work for combating horizontal monopolies, they don't do so much for vertical monopolies. We would need to ensure that if a company controlled one part of the supply chain, for instance the search engine, that they didn't control another, such as the browser or video platform — and that would involve breaking them up. You could definitely put regulation in place to prevent vertical integration, but we would still have to break up the vertical monopolies that already exist.

Vertical monopolies are actually more dangerous than horizontal monopolies, since while you could go to another company for a specific product, such as the search engine, you would still need to go to them for other things, such as the video platform. This means if you have a fundamental problem with the company itself, such as rampant censorship, you would either need to submit or give up on using every single one of their products.

A dystopian example would be a company town where every industry is controlled by a single company. You work for X Inc, buy your food from X Inc, and live in a house rented from X Inc. If you had a problem with that company you would need to move to another town. If this reminds you of Communism, that's exactly what it is, just that instead of a government controlling every aspect of your life, it's a business.