Changing the ownership does not address the problem, which is market concentration. You're still left with a company with too much power. That aside, look at the historical data. Nationalization has generally been disastrous and leads to all sorts of other pathologies.

What precisely would that solve in this case?

Previous attempts to nationalize companies have not, as far as I know, been a shining success?

This is Hacker News, you can't say the N word here.

Too dangerous unless it's a service that should be a vital government service.

You do not want your government to basically have a permanent monopoly on everything. This just gives power to authoritarian to rise.

Nationalization is corporate civil asset forfeiture.

Or maybe do the the China model, where the board of directors gets some mandatory appointed board members...? ;)

Only 1/2 /s there...