371–380 of 402 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's bizarre. Why would anyone delete their texts? It's such a transparent lie. Luckily the EU will soon go ahead with its chat control law, and the police will have access to all text and chat logs and will be able to prosecute any corruption in the parlament. At least that's what I think it's for.
Are you serious? I really can't tell.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's bizarre. Why would anyone delete their texts? It's such a transparent lie. Luckily the EU will soon go ahead with its chat control law, and the police will have access to all text and chat logs and will be able to prosecute any corruption in the parlament. At least that's what I think it's for.
> Luckily the EU will soon go ahead with its chat control law, and the police will have access to all text and chat logs and will be able to prosecute any corruption in the parlament. they'll exempt themselves
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think what I wrote disagrees with your comments. China doesn't have the same type of monopoly problem we do. It's a different kind. The point I am trying to make is that the effectiveness of the systems are constrained by their structure. It's not that we just have some monopolies that need to be destroyed. Because we keep getting new ones that hang around. We need to improve the structure so that there is le…
Save the transhumanism for when we need to increase Dunbar's Number to overcome the tyranny of structurelessness[0]. If you want a proactive fix ("better tires") for monopolization, then bring back ownership caps and start scrutinizing mergers & acquisitions again. The thing is, monopolies tend to be on the wrong side of the Innovator's Dilemma, but they short-circuit it by just buying the disruptors out. Think about…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So we are in agreement that abuse of corporate power and abuse of government power are both bad things to be avoided No comparing government power and the harm they can inflict (taking away your freedom) to corporate power (they can take away pictures of little Johny) are night and day. I can live my whole life without dealing with Google. > can you think of an example where too much government oversight of corpora…
> if you ever tell a friend on a company communication channel to call you even if it’s something personal you will be called by lawyers. So what? So you have to explain that you didn't violate the auditing laws? That's hardly a huge burden. Don't use corporate assets for personal communication, problem solved. > Government is trying to have back doors to all of your chat And they shouldn't. But the point is: for mos…
So are you okay with the government subpoenaing your private phone communications because they think when you asked your coworker to call you on your personal phone to talk about where you wanted to go out drinking?
Fascism is when the government controls every area of your life and of corporations. Do you think giving the government more control of the private sector will lessen the chance of fascism?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if you ever tell a friend on a company communication channel to call you even if it’s something personal you will be called by lawyers. So what? So you have to explain that you didn't violate the auditing laws? That's hardly a huge burden. Don't use corporate assets for personal communication, problem solved. > Government is trying to have back doors to all of your chat And they shouldn't. But the point is: for mos…
> So what? So you have to explain that you didn't violate the auditing laws? That's hardly a huge burden. Don't use corporate assets for personal communication, problem solved. So are you okay with the government subpoenaing your private phone communications because they think when you asked your coworker to call you on your personal phone to talk about where you wanted to go out drinking? Fascism is when the governm…
You keep bringing it back to personal civil liberty because you don't have an answer to the question "So why is more government oversight of corporations bad?"
I actually have no problem with such a subpoena being attempted (it is part of the regular process of investigating a crime), but I have a problem with a court rubber-stamping it. I have no problem with the corporation I'm working for being obligated to track and furnish similar records for any corporate assets I use, and to be obligated to ask questions if they catch wind that I might be trying to skirt auditing law by pushing conversations that should be legally audited private. Catch the difference?
> Fascism is when the government controls every area of your life and of corporations. Do you think giving the government more control of the private sector will lessen the chance of fascism?
I actually do because the definition you gave is not actually what fascism is.
Fascism is a political movement emphasizing extreme nationalism, a supremacy mythos of that nation, and the militarism necessary to support such an inherently unstable structure. Among its tools can be usurpation of corporations. But tight control of corporations is also a hallmark of socialism and communism, among other structures. You may as well say its wrong to breathe air because fascists do that too.
A healthy democracy reigns in the excesses of an unfettered corporate sector. Those excesses, left unchecked, can (not will, but can) result in, among other things, fascist-leaning private company owners throwing in the power of their corporations behind like-minded politicians and building the machine that facilitates a Mussolini or Hitler rising to power. Mussolini, in particular, was funded by Italian industrialists.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am getting the feeling you are being disingenuous: a record is a record, a records that gets deleted after 24 hours was still a record. This is a truth based only on the meaning of the word "record". The chat application was not kept from preserving history, it was designed to actively delete history after 24 hours If there is a court order to not delete history, then the application was designed to do the opposite…
Everything you do on a computer is recorded, at least ephemerally, in the computer memory. Does deleting stuff from the memory count as destroying evidence? If not, how is it different from deleting stuff from somewhere else? I mean, deleting information that is not used is part of how computer operate, if you're going to disallow that, you better have a pretty huge tech infrastructure to store all those memory dumps…
That such cases can exist doesn't mean it's not clear-cut here.
In the vast majority of cases, two engineers will agree on the question "is this data persisted or ephemeral" and the fact that the line is blurry doesn't mean we can't know when it's been crossed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So what? So you have to explain that you didn't violate the auditing laws? That's hardly a huge burden. Don't use corporate assets for personal communication, problem solved. So are you okay with the government subpoenaing your private phone communications because they think when you asked your coworker to call you on your personal phone to talk about where you wanted to go out drinking? Fascism is when the governm…
> So are you okay with the government subpoenaing your private phone communications You keep bringing it back to personal civil liberty because you don't have an answer to the question "So why is more government oversight of corporations bad?" I actually have no problem with such a subpoena being attempted (it is part of the regular process of investigating a crime), but I have a problem with a court rubber-stamping…
I just gave you a real example of where corporate oversight leads to giving the government access to your personal communications.
> I actually have no problem with such a subpoena being attempted (it is part of the regular process of investigating a crime), but I have a problem with a court rubber-stamping it.
Have you not been paying attention to what the government has been doing in the name of the War on Drugs, the War on Crime and the War on Terrorism?
> Fascism is a political movement emphasizing extreme nationalism
Have you not been paying attention to what’s been happening since 2016?
> A healthy democracy reigns in the excesses of an unfettered corporate sector
Exactly what power are you afraid that Google can have over you compared to the government?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So are you okay with the government subpoenaing your private phone communications You keep bringing it back to personal civil liberty because you don't have an answer to the question "So why is more government oversight of corporations bad?" I actually have no problem with such a subpoena being attempted (it is part of the regular process of investigating a crime), but I have a problem with a court rubber-stamping…
> You keep bringing it back to personal civil liberty because you don't have an answer to the question "So why is more government oversight of corporations bad?" I just gave you a real example of where corporate oversight leads to giving the government access to your personal communications. > I actually have no problem with such a subpoena being attempted (it is part of the regular process of investigating a crime),…
There were an awful lot of people concerned about the time they colluded to depress wages (https://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-tech-jo...).
And the people they fired to break unions (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-55173063).
And they're currently under investigation for monopolizing digital ad tech (https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-googl...).
Let's assume, ad argumento, that they have monopolized digital ad tech, meaning other digital advertisers are excluded and almost all the ads you see are single-source.
Gosh, it sure would suck if fascists gained control of that single source, wouldn't it? And as we've seen, we can't trust that won't happen just because they nailed up "Don't be evil" above the door (and then it fell off later).
We should probably enforce the laws that are in place to keep a market diverse and healthy.
... I think I see your position though. You're concerned, given current political climate, that increased government oversight could give fascists more power. I echo that concern... Except that I believe we got here because fascists recognized that nobody was watching the tech henhouse and weaponized that. We had an awful lot of tech firms thinking they were bigger than political concerns and should be a world apart from government oversight right up until they realized they aided and abetted those who organized Jan 6th, then... Oops.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No way. Any time I've had a debit card shut off, they made several blatant attempts to contact me, and when I called them they immediately connected me to the fraud department to help solve the issue. Getting a paypal/google/whatever account flagged is basically the death of that account.
You aren’t running a business, and you haven’t really dealt with your bank much beyond the e consumer level. They will cut you off as quickly as possible if they suspect anything nefarious going on. Banks are less reasonable than techs in this regards, you’ve just never used them to sell something.
Nonsense. Banks have someone you can get on the phone, usually 24/7. Good luck getting anyone at Google on the phone.