This kind of shit is one of the reasons why people stop believing in western democracy.
[flagged]
Three Companies Impersonated Millions to Influence Internet Policy
131–140 of 316 posts
Re: Three Companies Impersonated Millions to Influence Internet Policy
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
Slap on the wrist? Lol. $61.5m would be a slap on the wrist. $615k is a tip.
$615k is a stern look by a grandma whose eyes cannot help but betray just how much she loves you.
It works, because you love her.
An almost absurd question, but would it be possible to add love to company interactions?
Re: Three Companies Impersonated Millions to Influence Internet Policy
#133Re: Three Companies Impersonated Millions to Influence Internet Policy
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
If my dog bites somebody, I'm on the hook. It should be no different with companies--otherwise there's no incentive to avoid funding shady behavior. Stock ownership is rewarding because it's risky. Let it be risky.
I will not silently go to prison because my 401k worth under USD 20k owns 0.0015 shares as a part of some mutual fund. The CEO and the board do not do my bidding. Send them to prison.
Practically speaking, I'd expect the courts to round up the top 10 shareholders or something like that.
In principle though, I think partial ownership of a harmful company should expose you to some liability, whether or not the CEO listens to you.
Re: Three Companies Impersonated Millions to Influence Internet Policy
#135I remember debating with a guy I know about Net Neutrality leading up to this. He was a sales director at a company that ran network backbone and fiber lines. He was insistent that the Net Neutrality debate was dumb, because it was trying to negate the peering agreements that make the industry run. The way he told it, anyone with a big backbone chooses to invest in peering arrangements with other companies who also m…
There’s something there - Netflix had just moved to a tier 2/3 provider and they weren’t peered well and Netflix was trying to get the big ISPs to peer instead of selling transit - peering for an almost entirely one way connection. The t1s weren’t having it.
The moment Netflix setup caching servers in isp COs around the world they stopped caring about net neutrality. Strange.
Re: Three Companies Impersonated Millions to Influence Internet Policy
#136"An investigation by the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) found that the fake comments used the identities of millions of consumers, including thousands of New Yorkers, without their knowledge or consent." $615k seems like a slap on the wrist for what they did.
If an individual committed fraud by impersonating millions of people, they'd be in prison.
Not really. Vast majority of the crypto money made in 2021-2022 was by swarming ICOs and launchpads with sometimes hundreds of thousands (among people i personally know) and probably millions among those i don't, fake accounts - all having real names, addresses, IPs, passport scans etc. - getting in onto highly deficit launches when like 1 in a 100 trying gets in, and then the coin goes 10x because of immense demand. You do it with 100K accs, 1000 get in and buy coin for $500 each, you get $4m profit spending $500K for buy-ins and another $500K for accounts themselves ($5 apiece). Until even that stopped working because apparently, these fraudsters simply ran out of people worldwide. Some rather ordinary people made north of $100M this way, and i'm sure there are those i don't know (i'm not really in crypto at all, just like hanging out with smart guys) tho made billions. No one went to jail as far as i heard.
Re: Three Companies Impersonated Millions to Influence Internet Policy
#137What's a compelling argument in rejection of net neutrality (that these fake identities hypothetically would use)? Better delivery of in-network content, perhaps?
The best argument against it is you would be mandating that companies peer and increase the peering regardless of anything else; and that companies would have to peer with other companies even if they didn’t want to.
Re: Three Companies Impersonated Millions to Influence Internet Policy
#138I remember debating with a guy I know about Net Neutrality leading up to this. He was a sales director at a company that ran network backbone and fiber lines. He was insistent that the Net Neutrality debate was dumb, because it was trying to negate the peering agreements that make the industry run. The way he told it, anyone with a big backbone chooses to invest in peering arrangements with other companies who also m…
Doesn’t seem like a dumb argument to me, although I don’t think net neutrality would have actually interrupted or replaced most of those peering arrangements in practice.
If you’re pushing 15% of all internet traffic you’re going to end up peering, the best I can see net neutrality doing for Netflix is it sets the default payment to $0, giving them a better bargaining position going into any negotiation about peering arrangements, and probably gives them some legal protection against ISPs who might want to throttle Netflix traffic rather than agree to Netflix’s terms.
Re: Three Companies Impersonated Millions to Influence Internet Policy
#139Starlink would not exist if liberals passed net neutrality. I trust the market over politicians.
I don't understand your position. Are you saying the fraud is justified, or do you make remarks like this to help you feel like you're "owning the libs"?
Re: Three Companies Impersonated Millions to Influence Internet Policy
#140I have to wonder how on Earth this is not a criminal matter. Where I live, signing a document with someone else's name is, AFAIK, something you could potentially go to jail for.