3 ms·
You're spinning things in the most negative light possible ("outed," "colluding") -- but you're right! He apparently interacted with the Clinton campaign. Quell
by chasing 10y ago
You're spinning things in the most negative light possible ("outed," "colluding") -- but you're right! He apparently interacted with the Clinton campaign. Quelle horreur!
Given the damaging nature of all of the fake news and trolling flying around during the campaign -- including the metric buttload of mountains-made-from-molehills relating to Hillary's e-mails -- I can absolutely understand how someone might think the internet needs some fixing.
I don't agree with the ideas he presents in the article, but I also don't think having a connection to Hillary Clinton's campaign reveals any nefarious intent.
- a_imho 10y agoNefarious not, but it is clearly stated in the article where he is coming from. "Its inherent lack of security has allowed Russian actors to screw with our democratic process." Well, he maybe cares deeply about cyberbullying, to me his arguments feel a bit - dishonest?
- chasing 10y agoHe clearly stated in the article where he's coming from... but that makes him seem dishonest to you? I'm not really sure what you're expecting. He's seen something that he felt when horribly awry and he's made some proposals he thinks could improve things.
- a_imho 10y agoExactly, to me it reads he wants to regulate the internet because of political reasons, but he is mixing in a lot of other things that makes it more opaque. I agree with the parent, it reads like a political piece to me too that has little to do with technology and such it is nice to have a disclaimer about his affiliation* *disclaimer: I'm not American nor living in the US