EU Commission: ‘No longer acceptable’ for platforms to take key decisions alone • Hacker News Board

Re: EU Commission: ‘No longer acceptable’ for platforms to take key decisions alone

#201

Post by outside1234 » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 5:15 AM UTC

shripadk wrote: post #195

echelon wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100%. Germany is so wrong about this, and this is not the way we should go. We Americans needs to grow thicker skin and cherish our free speech more. If we don't, we're going to slip into a world with less liberty. Libel, slander, and "yelling fire" are sufficient limits on free speech. Seeing or hearing people say things you don't like isn't going to kill you. Society already has the tools to shun those who act egre…

That boat has long sailed once Big Tech banned Parler and everyone cheered it. America is no longer a country where free speech is paramount. Atleast in other democratic countries Censorship happens through the elected Government. As a citizen you can always remove the elected representatives if you don't like the Censorship implemented by your elected representatives for whatever reason. You can't remove/vote out Fa…

Parler banned Parler. They refused to take down material that was obviously detrimental to society. We would not put up with television stations planning to kidnap senators either. You don’t get to yell fire in a theatre. They were warned. They didn’t do anything. They banned themselves.

Re: EU Commission: ‘No longer acceptable’ for platforms to take key decisions alone

#202

Post by shripadk » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 5:18 AM UTC

proactivesvcs wrote: post #25

Assuming that a company's terms of service are deemed fair and legal, why would it be "no longer acceptable" to apply them? I couldn't care less how high profile someone is, what public office they hold; if they break the agreement they made with a service provider, they should be subject to the consequences they agreed to. What I would like to see is a company being obliged to enforce its terms of service promptly,…

It's not just as simple as you make it sound. What this Censorship has done is conveyed to the World that American Government cannot be trusted. That America has 2 power centers not 1. The two power centers being American Government and Big Tech.

Any ban or removal should come from the elected Government. In this case it is the US Congress. This is what the World expects as this is how all Democratically elected Governments all over the World function. It is the Government which has a final say.

Now when Big Tech unilaterally decides to censor a sitting US President and bans a rival competitor this will cause every World leader and Government to sit up and take note. Everyone will ask themselves: are we now supposed to trust US Government for its word? What if tomorrow a private company decides to censor the US Government? If they can ban the US President's account they wield more power than even elected representatives. Why then should we liaison with US Government and why not directly talk to Big Tech as they seem to hold the power over even the US President.

Then it goes further than that: how do we trust that the incoming President won't be censored? Since all communications happen through a digital forum where one of the Big Tech companies is an intermediary in relaying such communications what is the guarantee that the communication is not tampered with? When Big Tech enjoys so much power in US, that it can censor the Government itself, then why can't this also be possible? If Big Tech can attach disclaimers to a sitting US President's content then why can't they tamper with the messaging too?

This sort of confusion existed for countries like Pakistan which has dual power centers: the elected Government and the military. You won't know whom to talk to as one can override the other. Which is why you have so many successful coups in Pakistan. What Big Tech has done is set a very dangerous precedent. Now no World leader will trust the word of the American Government at face value and will double/triple check every communication.

Re: EU Commission: ‘No longer acceptable’ for platforms to take key decisions alone

#203

Post by shripadk » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 5:19 AM UTC

Gibbon1 wrote: post #200

shripadk wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That boat has long sailed once Big Tech banned Parler and everyone cheered it. America is no longer a country where free speech is paramount. Atleast in other democratic countries Censorship happens through the elected Government. As a citizen you can always remove the elected representatives if you don't like the Censorship implemented by your elected representatives for whatever reason. You can't remove/vote out Fa…

> America is no longer a country where free speech is paramount. My answer to that is you and your friends have talked up sedition for so long that you've normalized it. And can't wrap your head around the thought that it's actually criminal and always has been. You've gotten away with that because up until now the government hasn't really cared. Take a note, after Jan 6th they now care.

I'm not an American. So what sedition are you talking about? I won't comment on the rest of your stupid statement as you haven't even understood what I was saying. Maybe learn to read the entire comment before you give your 2 cents.

---

Editing because rate limited

> Not being an American perhaps you should be even more concerned about what you say. This just doesn't change the US Governments view what what you've been up to, your government also will be taking a very dim view.

Are you for real? I don't give a fuck as to what US Government thinks of me. I don't give a fuck to what my Government thinks of me. I have a clear view of what has transpired and I know the repercussions this will have on internet and our freedoms. No one can take that right of opinion away from me. Not you, not the American Government, not my Government. Neither have I been involved in any seditious activities nor will I ever be. It just goes to show how anti-free speech America has become these days. It shows in your replies to me that you can't even tolerate an opposing viewpoint without insinuations and veiled threats.

Re: EU Commission: ‘No longer acceptable’ for platforms to take key decisions alone

#204

Post by scrollaway » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 5:26 AM UTC

shripadk wrote: post #195

echelon wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100%. Germany is so wrong about this, and this is not the way we should go. We Americans needs to grow thicker skin and cherish our free speech more. If we don't, we're going to slip into a world with less liberty. Libel, slander, and "yelling fire" are sufficient limits on free speech. Seeing or hearing people say things you don't like isn't going to kill you. Society already has the tools to shun those who act egre…

That boat has long sailed once Big Tech banned Parler and everyone cheered it. America is no longer a country where free speech is paramount. Atleast in other democratic countries Censorship happens through the elected Government. As a citizen you can always remove the elected representatives if you don't like the Censorship implemented by your elected representatives for whatever reason. You can't remove/vote out Fa…

> The very fact that Parler was banned by Big Tech and not by US Congress puts a very bad light on America.

That you think a private company being shunned by other private companies, is worse for free speech than a private company being banned by the government, shows you don't really understand the american definition of free speech.

Re: EU Commission: ‘No longer acceptable’ for platforms to take key decisions alone

#205

Post by Gibbon1 » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 5:26 AM UTC

shripadk wrote: post #203

Gibbon1 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> America is no longer a country where free speech is paramount. My answer to that is you and your friends have talked up sedition for so long that you've normalized it. And can't wrap your head around the thought that it's actually criminal and always has been. You've gotten away with that because up until now the government hasn't really cared. Take a note, after Jan 6th they now care.

I'm not an American. So what sedition are you talking about? I won't comment on the rest of your stupid statement as you haven't even understood what I was saying. Maybe learn to read the entire comment before you give your 2 cents. --- Editing because rate limited > Not being an American perhaps you should be even more concerned about what you say. This just doesn't change the US Governments view what what you've be…

Not being an American perhaps you should be even more concerned about what you say. This just doesn't change the US Governments view what what you've been up to, your government also will be taking a very dim view.

Re: EU Commission: ‘No longer acceptable’ for platforms to take key decisions alone

#206

Post by Veedrac » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 5:33 AM UTC

zmmmmm wrote: post #126

It's hard to overlook that the political class is suddenly up in arms about this primarily because they suddenly perceive themselves as being under threat from it. Ordinary individuals and businesses have had to deal with the hegemony of the platforms for a long time and it hasn't really mattered until now. I fear the outcome of this is going to be that it translates into massive regulatory overreach and splitting up…

This comment doesn't make much sense given the announcement of the Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act recently preceded this.

Re: EU Commission: ‘No longer acceptable’ for platforms to take key decisions alone

#207

Post by frombody » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 5:33 AM UTC

RhodoYolo wrote: post #186

zmmmmm wrote: post #126

It's hard to overlook that the political class is suddenly up in arms about this primarily because they suddenly perceive themselves as being under threat from it. Ordinary individuals and businesses have had to deal with the hegemony of the platforms for a long time and it hasn't really mattered until now. I fear the outcome of this is going to be that it translates into massive regulatory overreach and splitting up…

What would breaking them up even mean? I feel we would be in the same situation as brexit - How do we split them without collapsing all the pieces? You can point to microsoft but modern american has brought an entirely different, much larger, more entrenched behemoths than what we've seen.

This image doesn't cut things evenly, but illustrates the issue well.

https://mobile.twitter.com/finshots/status/12653067031861616...

Re: EU Commission: ‘No longer acceptable’ for platforms to take key decisions alone

#208

Post by shripadk » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 5:34 AM UTC

scrollaway wrote: post #204

shripadk wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That boat has long sailed once Big Tech banned Parler and everyone cheered it. America is no longer a country where free speech is paramount. Atleast in other democratic countries Censorship happens through the elected Government. As a citizen you can always remove the elected representatives if you don't like the Censorship implemented by your elected representatives for whatever reason. You can't remove/vote out Fa…

> The very fact that Parler was banned by Big Tech and not by US Congress puts a very bad light on America. That you think a private company being shunned by other private companies, is worse for free speech than a private company being banned by the government, shows you don't really understand the american definition of free speech.

I don't care about American Free Speech. I'm not an American. I'm an Indian.

Yes it is worse for America's image that a competitor censors another competitor. It puts a bad light on the US Government itself that it cannot regulate private companies and are at the mercy of private companies that even Government communications can be censored. This is far beyond what free speech is all about.

And don't tell me US Government hasn't banned private companies. Huawei ban immediately comes to mind. So many companies have been banned for nefarious activities including but not limited to fraud and scams. It is 100 percent in the purview of US Congress to ban for any violations of law. Free speech has nothing to do with powers the US Government enjoys vis-a-vis legal entities like a company or trust. A company is not an individual. A company is not a Citizen of the United States. A company doesn't enjoy free speech rights. It is a legal entity that was allowed to function because of the US Government. Not because Apple, Facebook, Twitter or Google decided to. Only the US Government can cancel trade licenses, company registration and debar individuals from ever holding directorship. That power is not vested in the hands of few silicon valley companies.

Re: EU Commission: ‘No longer acceptable’ for platforms to take key decisions alone

#209

Post by ttt0 » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 5:50 AM UTC

readflaggedcomm wrote: post #36

j_walter wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. We don't have civil discourse anymore...people just yell and call people names. You don't like what the other person says they are a "libtard"...or a "racist". You don't like what they are doing online, get them kicked off or dox them to your friends. Justify online bullying like it's a sport. Now it's escalated to not just banning them from social media...but a coordinated effort to destroy the alternative pla…

When did speaking truth to power become "bullying"? And anyway, removing those who spew violent rhetoric is how civility is restored. The fact that the response to Twitter bans is so violent proves somebody needed to be silenced.

When every corporation agrees with you and amplifies your message, can you really call that "speaking truth to power"?

Re: EU Commission: ‘No longer acceptable’ for platforms to take key decisions alone

#210

Post by fulafel » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 6:04 AM UTC

syntaxing wrote: post #60

I know this is a heated topic but I really don’t understand what the other options are. Having businesses dictate who they want to serve seems like censorship but having the government dictate it seems way worse. I’m not sure how to decouple or balance the freedom of will as a business, freedom of will as a person and the societal mandate of the majority (which is how democracy works? It’s always about the majority v…

We have other more democratic models of handling this in distributed social networks that aren't under centralised corporate control. Email, telephone system, Mastodon... Federation and regulated platforms, and some other ways of organisation let you have localised systems of censorship that aren't all-powerful in the network.