111–120 of 550 posts
This shut down story is another tale in the impending international regulation, and maybe breaking up, of what is comically called 'big tech' ('big' does not begin to describe the sizes involved, the naivety is staggering). As newspaper barons before them, the internet has not policed itself adequately enough, according to the governments of the world, and now they will act in unity to take back some control. And the…
This is the trouble with censorship. Where do you stop?
This shut down story is another tale in the impending international regulation, and maybe breaking up, of what is comically called 'big tech' ('big' does not begin to describe the sizes involved, the naivety is staggering). As newspaper barons before them, the internet has not policed itself adequately enough, according to the governments of the world, and now they will act in unity to take back some control. And the…
What makes you think the future will be so dystopian? In Western countries such as the United States citizens have a high level of political participation and awareness of various issues. If the government attempts to unilaterally throttle the Internet there will be such a large uproar that our political leaders will be overturned on the next election. Plus, the newly voted-in Democratic leadership has a policy of ad…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and anonymous use will be illegal. Super interesting that you mention this. I was just thinking the other day about what an absolute dumpster fire "the internet" is due to anonymity (obviously that's not the _only_ reason, but it's a non-trivial reason). This idea that "Let's give people the ability to be anonymous, and somehow, that's gonna make us all bond together and be better" is pretty hilarious in hindsight.…
> I would personally love to see a "web" where you have to comment...as your public self. Isn't this Facebook? Granted I'm sure not every single profile is "verified" with an actual ID, but lack of anonymity doesn't seem to stop as many people as you'd think.
I think FB/Twitter and others got bold, but kinda forgot they are also most likely digging themselves deep into regulation hell.
They feel they have the power and self imprimatur to manage speech as they see fit, but now also activists are telling them to shut this or that voice they disagree with.
They made this bed themselves.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is how the right has been feeling for a while. This is nothing new behaviour-wise for Facebook, the only difference is this gets more favourable media attention.
> this gets more favourable media attention. The "favourable media attention" you are talking about is here the Socialist Workers' Party reporting about itself on its own website. I'd wager the BBC will not cover this at all, in contrast to acres of free promotion for Parler etc.
See: how Farage was treated by the BCC, versus Corbyn
Related: https://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/research/rese...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
More to do with certain people with disproportionate influence deciding what isn't allowed to be discussed. A partial list: The displacement of European peoples. Holocaust revisionism. Boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel.
[flagged]
How is this the official line? Jews were the primary target but I’ve never ever seen anything ‘official’ claim they were the only ones.
This shut down story is another tale in the impending international regulation, and maybe breaking up, of what is comically called 'big tech' ('big' does not begin to describe the sizes involved, the naivety is staggering). As newspaper barons before them, the internet has not policed itself adequately enough, according to the governments of the world, and now they will act in unity to take back some control. And the…
>Citizens will require a personal licence to access the internet, and anonymous use will be illegal. I mean you already do. What do you call a signing up to an ISP?
I think FB/Twitter and others got bold, but kinda forgot they are also most likely digging themselves deep into regulation hell.
It feels like they opened a Pandora’s box. They feel they have the power and self imprimatur to manage speech as they see fit, but now also activists are telling them to shut this or that voice they disagree with. They made this bed themselves.
Well they shut down the former president of the USA. They clearly have nothing to fear.