Trump Wants To Regulate Google

[B-Man]

TWITTER IS DUMB, EXHIBIT #1,000,006:

 

 

 

More at the thread.

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[DC Tom]

2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

I don't like Twitter choosing sides.  But I don't like pretending the government is neutral and unbiased, either.

[Deranged Rhino]

1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

I don't like Twitter choosing sides.  But I don't like pretending the government is neutral and unbiased, either.

 

I fully admit to being at a loss as to how to fix the situation. Breaking up companies seems like it won't work, having a government censor/arbitrator seems problematic... No idea what the fix is.

[TakeYouToTasker]

16 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I fully admit to being at a loss as to how to fix the situation. Breaking up companies seems like it won't work, having a government censor/arbitrator seems problematic... No idea what the fix is.

 

Pass legislation declaring social media platforms to be the public square as far as speech and expression go, and encourage the various platforms to allow individuals broad filter tools to choose not to listen to ideas they don’t like, should they choose not to.

[Koko78]

32 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I fully admit to being at a loss as to how to fix the situation. Breaking up companies seems like it won't work, having a government censor/arbitrator seems problematic... No idea what the fix is.

 

The unfortunate reality is that Twitter, Facebook, etc. have made their bed by engaging in political discriminatory practices. Now they're going to get regulated.

 

They'll be damned lucky if they don't eventually lose some (if not all) of their legal protections under the DMCA.

[B-Man]

 

 

THUMB ON THE SCALE: 

 

 

 

Liberal Psychologist: Google Generated At Least 2.6 Million Votes For Hillary.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[DC Tom]

2 hours ago, Koko78 said:

 

The unfortunate reality is that Twitter, Facebook, etc. have made their bed by engaging in political discriminatory practices. Now they're going to get regulated.

 

They'll be damned lucky if they don't eventually lose some (if not all) of their legal protections under the DMCA.

 

Well, the Democrats have made the argument that social media is a critical electoral infrastructure, so they shouldn't be surprised when there's a backlash to social media censuring conservative campaigns.  

 

Stupidity, for once, has consequences.

[Chef Jim]

18 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

Pass legislation declaring social media platforms to be the public square as far as speech and expression go, and encourage the various platforms to allow individuals broad filter tools to choose not to listen to ideas they don’t like, should they choose not to.

 

This is a terrible idea. You are encouraging people to put on blinders and follow, listen and learn from only those with like ideas?  

[TakeYouToTasker]

1 hour ago, Chef Jim said:

 

This is a terrible idea. You are encouraging people to put on blinders and follow, listen and learn from only those with like ideas?  

 

Not at all.  

 

What I’m saying is that there should be a functional “ignore” feature, much like this site has, with more functionality because the user base is larger.

 

Essentially the web equivalent of “changing the channel” or “canceling the newspaper subscription”.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

...not sure how you could ever legislate against the electronics age politicization and directional leanings......1st Amendment rights have ben woefully strained from what our forefathers EVER intended....it has become a vague shield for crossing the original line into twisted protectionisms....the parameters of the initial intent are truly being tested...... 

[Chef Jim]

40 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

Not at all.  

 

What I’m saying is that there should be a functional “ignore” feature, much like this site has, with more functionality because the user base is larger.

 

Essentially the web equivalent of “changing the channel” or “canceling the newspaper subscription”.

 

Why would I, or anyone with an open mind, want to filter out 100% of the content of a site because you don’t “like” some of their content. Unless I’m misunderstanding the functionality you’re suggesting. 

 

Ans the web had a “change the channel” feature. It’s calls the “back button”. 

[TakeYouToTasker]

13 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Why would I, or anyone with an open mind, want to filter out 100% of the content of a site because you don’t “like” some of their content. Unless I’m misunderstanding the functionality you’re suggesting. 

 

Ans the web had a “change the channel” feature. It’s calls the “back button”. 

 

Do you watch CNN?  FoxNews?  MSNBC?

 

Do you enjoy interacting with internet trolls?

 

Do you find value in positions staked out by the Klu Klux Klan or Antifa?

 

You might.  

 

Others might not.

 

A right to speak is not a right to make others choose to listen.

 

(edit:  the broader “you”, not meaning to imply that you find value in any of those things)

Edited August 10, 2019 by TakeYouToTasker

[Chef Jim]

2 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

Do you watch CNN?  FoxNews?  MSNBC?

 

Do you enjoy interacting with internet trolls?

 

Do you find value in positions staked out by the Klu Klux Klan or Antifa?

 

You might.  

 

Others might not.

 

A right to speak is not a right to make others choose to listen.

 

(edit:  the broader “you”, not meaning to imply that you find value in any of those things)

 

I just feel allowing people to be more closed minded is not a good thing.  Make others choose to listen? Holy crappy dude. What kind of whacky double speak is that? 

 

Needing a filter to protect you from ideas that you may not like in my mind is the definition of a snowflake. A closed minded snowflake. 

[BeginnersMind]

Here’s what the gov can do to fix social media:

 

- remove the autoplay feature from YouTube,

- end infinite scrolling on Twitter and Facebook feeds,

- limit scrolling time to three-minute sessions,

- set default limits on the use of platforms to 30 minutes a day, 

- outlaw Snapchat streaks (rewards for consecutive days of contact with friends) and most “gamification” (badges, rewards) for any online service,

- require an FTC report to Congress describing how internet companies “interfere with free choices of individuals” by “exploiting human psychology and brain physiology.” 

 

Get r done. 

 

 

 

 

[/dev/null]

58 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

Here’s what the gov can do to fix social media:

 

- remove the autoplay feature from YouTube,

- end infinite scrolling on Twitter and Facebook feeds,

- limit scrolling time to three-minute sessions,

- set default limits on the use of platforms to 30 minutes a day, 

- outlaw Snapchat streaks (rewards for consecutive days of contact with friends) and most “gamification” (badges, rewards) for any online service,

- require an FTC report to Congress describing how internet companies “interfere with free choices of individuals” by “exploiting human psychology and brain physiology.” 

 

Get r done. 

 

 

 

 

 

While they're at it, maybe they can regulate loot boxes so all players get a minimum number of sweet l3wtz.  And membership of a raid guarantees a minimum number of Epic and Legendary items

[BeginnersMind]

57 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

 

While they're at it, maybe they can regulate loot boxes so all players get a minimum number of sweet l3wtz.  And membership of a raid guarantees a minimum number of Epic and Legendary items

 

Your modern Republican Party at work.

[Teddy KGB]

1 minute ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Your modern Republican Party at work.

 

Time limits lol 

 

What a dumbass ?. 

 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

15 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Your modern Republican Party at work.

 

lol wut