3 ms·

At some point, some government is going to have to step in and stop Facebook. Five years ago, I would not have believed that I would have supported government a

by hluska 8y ago

At some point, some government is going to have to step in and stop Facebook. Five years ago, I would not have believed that I would have supported government action. Now, I’m afraid for the future if there is no intervention.

swebs 8y ago
Have you read the Prism papers? Governments love this mass data collection since it makes their job so much easier.
- hluska 8y ago
  Well yeah, I’m sure they do, but at what cost? The same data collection that government loves so much has been misused to throw elections and genuinely cast doubt upon the democratic process. Ultimately, creating this big giant drag nets has only empowered companies to demonstrate a complete lack of regard for humanity. If that’s security, I no longer want to be secure.
  - codedokode 8y ago
    > The same data collection that government loves so much has been misused to throw elections If this is done in favor of the current government, then they probably won't mind.
    - hluska 8y ago
      I am sad by how incredibly accurate this statement is. Great comment, but geez, let me put my head back in the sand...:)
- askmike 8y ago
  It only makes the job of intelligence agencies easier, a tiny part of an government. And one that wouldn't play any role in intervening in a company like proposed.
Cthulhu_ 8y ago
I don't know if you've followed the news, but multiple governments have investigated, sued and fined Facebook. A quick Google indicates Facebook may end up paying 1.6 billion to the EU. The UK is doing an investigation too, with FB's impact on the Brexit referendum, as well as the whole Cambridge Analytica thing. If you're thinking Facebook is getting away with it, you're wrong. Of course, they're mainly getting fined; if that isn't harsh enough punishment then I don't know what to do next, that's dangerous territory.
- ben_w 8y ago
  Eventually fines can exceed revenue. There are also laws which allow board members to be directly liable, one of which (I have been told by trade-union-funded free legal aid) is the UK can go after board members who knowingly trade while insolvent — and demand they personally pay the debts. Another (which is merely me reading the law and therefore probably doesn’t mean what I think it does) is prison time and equipment seizure if a business engages in copyright infringement commercially.
- viraptor 8y ago
  > that isn't harsh enough punishment then I don't know what to do next, Split the business into smaller, independent ones. We've seen this before. There's enough services hiding inside FB that treating them like a monopoly is not a terrible idea.
  - astura 8y ago
    What, exactly, does Facebook have a monopoly on? It's not social media, chat, photo sharing, events, ads, or news.
    - viraptor 8y ago
      They don't. I meant the similar approach of splitting them up would make both the regulation easier and self-regulation more incentivise - the same reason monopolies are split.
    - 8y ago

by hluska 8y ago

swebs 8y ago

Have you read the Prism papers? Governments love this mass data collection since it makes their job so much easier.

hluska 8y ago
Well yeah, I’m sure they do, but at what cost? The same data collection that government loves so much has been misused to throw elections and genuinely cast doubt upon the democratic process. Ultimately, creating this big giant drag nets has only empowered companies to demonstrate a complete lack of regard for humanity. If that’s security, I no longer want to be secure.
- codedokode 8y ago
  > The same data collection that government loves so much has been misused to throw elections If this is done in favor of the current government, then they probably won't mind.
  - hluska 8y ago
    I am sad by how incredibly accurate this statement is. Great comment, but geez, let me put my head back in the sand...:)
askmike 8y ago
It only makes the job of intelligence agencies easier, a tiny part of an government. And one that wouldn't play any role in intervening in a company like proposed.

Cthulhu_ 8y ago

I don't know if you've followed the news, but multiple governments have investigated, sued and fined Facebook. A quick Google indicates Facebook may end up paying 1.6 billion to the EU. The UK is doing an investigation too, with FB's impact on the Brexit referendum, as well as the whole Cambridge Analytica thing. If you're thinking Facebook is getting away with it, you're wrong. Of course, they're mainly getting fined; if that isn't harsh enough punishment then I don't know what to do next, that's dangerous territory.

ben_w 8y ago
Eventually fines can exceed revenue. There are also laws which allow board members to be directly liable, one of which (I have been told by trade-union-funded free legal aid) is the UK can go after board members who knowingly trade while insolvent — and demand they personally pay the debts. Another (which is merely me reading the law and therefore probably doesn’t mean what I think it does) is prison time and equipment seizure if a business engages in copyright infringement commercially.
viraptor 8y ago
> that isn't harsh enough punishment then I don't know what to do next, Split the business into smaller, independent ones. We've seen this before. There's enough services hiding inside FB that treating them like a monopoly is not a terrible idea.
- astura 8y ago
  What, exactly, does Facebook have a monopoly on? It's not social media, chat, photo sharing, events, ads, or news.
  - viraptor 8y ago
    They don't. I meant the similar approach of splitting them up would make both the regulation easier and self-regulation more incentivise - the same reason monopolies are split.
  - 8y ago