A little SF personal injury case threatens 'most important law' on the Internet

Post by hueving » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 2:56 AM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #44

hueving wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Didn't Brazil recently require WhatsApp to cease service in the country for a short bit of time? No, a judge had whatsapp blocked in Brazil and it resulted in a backlash from citizens.

And then you have e.g. Uber using that backlash effect as the core part of their business strategy, turning people against their governments to ensure a market for themselves. And then you have tobacco companies suing countries for anti-smoking laws, because fuck it, why not. And then you have corporations playing states and countries off each other by getting them to compete over jobs with tax breaks. So no, nation…

Post by pkaeding » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 5:24 AM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #112

hueving wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>turning people against their governments to ensure a market for themselves. If the government is no longer representing the will of the people in a democracy, isn't change the point?

Not when you change the will of the people to go against their own interest so that you can make a profit.

Post by hueving » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 5:12 PM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #114

pkaeding wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So who should decide when the people are too dumb to know what are their own interests and their own will?

It's the job of the government - to protect the common interest of the society that gives it the power. "People [being] too dumb to know what are their own interests" is pretty much a definition of the term "coordination problems", and humans form governments precisely in order to solve those.