5 ms·

This will continue happening around the world. Who knew - sovereign states don’t want American megacorporations deciding what ideas are appropriate? Prepare fo

This will continue happening around the world. Who knew - sovereign states don’t want American megacorporations deciding what ideas are appropriate? Prepare for massive Balkanization of the Internet.

root_axis 6y ago
This is a dishonest line. The internet is federated, they don't have to use websites created by American megacorporations.
- ceilingcorner 6y ago
  What is a lie? I think it’s highly unlikely that Facebook and Twitter will be used worldwide in say, 2040. They had first mover advantage, but as it becomes easier to create a social network and the law catches up, I’d expect to see a lot of local/regional alternatives. If the EU said tomorrow, in 1 year we are banning Facebook and launching our own version, what can Facebook do about it?
  - randompwd 6y ago
    Bring an appeal to the ECJ or pay a few senators some money to get the CIA (USA's defacto sly foreign army) to kill some people. Whichever costs less for them.
- jessaustin 6y ago
  I don't find this dishonest at all. Not everyone in USA agrees with the Great Suspensioning. Why would we expect everyone in Poland to agree with it?
  - root_axis 6y ago
    If they don't agree they don't have to use it. It's dishonest because the characterization suggests that sovereign nations are beholden to tech companies, but they aren't.
    - Nydhal 6y ago
      Define beholden.
    - j0ba 6y ago
      If Facebook/Twitter doesn't agree to the law, they don't have to operate in Poland. Nobody is forcing them.
      - root_axis 6y ago
        Correct. So if anything Facebook/Twitter are beholden to these governments, not the other way around, they could simply block these megacorps if they were inclined to do so. I'm sure that would make many Polish tech founders very happy.
    - SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
      They also don't have to allow foreign tech companies to operate in their country without following local laws. US tech companies hold almost as much power in these smaller countries as the government does. Facebook could easily sway an election if it tries.
      - root_axis 6y ago
        > They also don't have to allow foreign tech companies to operate in their country without following local laws. Exactly right. So it's wrong to say that these governments are beholden to the tech companies, they could simply block them if wanted to, and perhaps they should, but either way it's obviously wrong to say that these governments are beholden. > Facebook could easily sway an election if it tries. So could the people being banned by Facebook. What's your point here?
        SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
        There is a step between banning and giving a free for all which is requiring that social media follow local laws with the threat of being banned for non compliance.
- paganel 6y ago
  > websites created by American megacorporations Where's the money for creating non-American websites? Yes, I'm still bitter after 10 or so years that the local business directory website/start-up I was working on got part of its data copied by the up and coming Google Places. We folded, of course, Google Places "transferred" its data to the whole Google ecosystem. I was telling my boss at the time "they can't let Google do this, is theft", they let Google do that, and then some.
- paulnechifor 6y ago
  That's exactly the argument for GDPR is. If an American megacorp doesn't want to respect the rights of non Americans then it shouldn't be allowed to profit at all from them. You can't just ban some and profit from the rest.
  - root_axis 6y ago
    I think it's perfectly reasonable for non-American countries to impose laws on the tech businesses if they want to do business in those regions, but it's a dishonest characterization to suggest that what happens on a handful of American websites "determines what is appropriate", they don't have any such power.
- jpambrun 6y ago
  They have a worldwide monopoly. If countries can't enforce their law on these platforms they will likely ban them on their territory. No Nation want to forgo their sovereignty to US corporations and delegate to them what is fair speech. Expect their algorithms to be under scrutiny as well.
  - ausbah 6y ago
    I think US megacorps have more malleable ethics than you are giving them credit for. these corps already have the ability to federated their services, and don't seem to have an issue with meeting the demands of less-than-savory governments like China's
inglor_cz 6y ago
That is sort of inevitable. Remember the cartoons mocking Muhammad? It is not as if there is a worldwide consensus on whether mocking him is even legal. Some people consider it a crime worthy of death and others their natural right. You can't get much bigger polarization than that. Compared to the Cartoon Question, differences between R and D are not that big.
- casefields 6y ago
  Cartoon: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4d/Charliehebdo.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4d/Charliehebdo....
nkohari 6y ago
You say that like it's a bad thing. The web used to be much less centralized than it is today, and not to its detriment. If we're talking about breaking up the physical Internet, that's clearly bad, but having alternatives to the Facebook/Twitter/etc monolith would be a clear net-win.
guram11 6y ago
even government of sovereign states are afraid of being cancelled too the big techs have brought this upon themselves, their social media has become the battleground for narratives using propaganda and political correctness, these "fact check"(censorship) will only get uglier

root_axis 6y ago

This is a dishonest line. The internet is federated, they don't have to use websites created by American megacorporations.

ceilingcorner 6y ago
What is a lie? I think it’s highly unlikely that Facebook and Twitter will be used worldwide in say, 2040. They had first mover advantage, but as it becomes easier to create a social network and the law catches up, I’d expect to see a lot of local/regional alternatives. If the EU said tomorrow, in 1 year we are banning Facebook and launching our own version, what can Facebook do about it?
- randompwd 6y ago
  Bring an appeal to the ECJ or pay a few senators some money to get the CIA (USA's defacto sly foreign army) to kill some people. Whichever costs less for them.
jessaustin 6y ago
I don't find this dishonest at all. Not everyone in USA agrees with the Great Suspensioning. Why would we expect everyone in Poland to agree with it?
- root_axis 6y ago
  If they don't agree they don't have to use it. It's dishonest because the characterization suggests that sovereign nations are beholden to tech companies, but they aren't.
  - Nydhal 6y ago
    Define beholden.
  - j0ba 6y ago
    If Facebook/Twitter doesn't agree to the law, they don't have to operate in Poland. Nobody is forcing them.
    - root_axis 6y ago
      Correct. So if anything Facebook/Twitter are beholden to these governments, not the other way around, they could simply block these megacorps if they were inclined to do so. I'm sure that would make many Polish tech founders very happy.
  - SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
    They also don't have to allow foreign tech companies to operate in their country without following local laws. US tech companies hold almost as much power in these smaller countries as the government does. Facebook could easily sway an election if it tries.
    - root_axis 6y ago
      > They also don't have to allow foreign tech companies to operate in their country without following local laws. Exactly right. So it's wrong to say that these governments are beholden to the tech companies, they could simply block them if wanted to, and perhaps they should, but either way it's obviously wrong to say that these governments are beholden. > Facebook could easily sway an election if it tries. So could the people being banned by Facebook. What's your point here?
      - SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
        There is a step between banning and giving a free for all which is requiring that social media follow local laws with the threat of being banned for non compliance.
paganel 6y ago
> websites created by American megacorporations Where's the money for creating non-American websites? Yes, I'm still bitter after 10 or so years that the local business directory website/start-up I was working on got part of its data copied by the up and coming Google Places. We folded, of course, Google Places "transferred" its data to the whole Google ecosystem. I was telling my boss at the time "they can't let Google do this, is theft", they let Google do that, and then some.
paulnechifor 6y ago
That's exactly the argument for GDPR is. If an American megacorp doesn't want to respect the rights of non Americans then it shouldn't be allowed to profit at all from them. You can't just ban some and profit from the rest.
- root_axis 6y ago
  I think it's perfectly reasonable for non-American countries to impose laws on the tech businesses if they want to do business in those regions, but it's a dishonest characterization to suggest that what happens on a handful of American websites "determines what is appropriate", they don't have any such power.
jpambrun 6y ago
They have a worldwide monopoly. If countries can't enforce their law on these platforms they will likely ban them on their territory. No Nation want to forgo their sovereignty to US corporations and delegate to them what is fair speech. Expect their algorithms to be under scrutiny as well.
- ausbah 6y ago
  I think US megacorps have more malleable ethics than you are giving them credit for. these corps already have the ability to federated their services, and don't seem to have an issue with meeting the demands of less-than-savory governments like China's

inglor_cz 6y ago

That is sort of inevitable. Remember the cartoons mocking Muhammad? It is not as if there is a worldwide consensus on whether mocking him is even legal. Some people consider it a crime worthy of death and others their natural right. You can't get much bigger polarization than that. Compared to the Cartoon Question, differences between R and D are not that big.

casefields 6y ago
Cartoon: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4d/Charliehebdo.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4d/Charliehebdo....

nkohari 6y ago

You say that like it's a bad thing. The web used to be much less centralized than it is today, and not to its detriment. If we're talking about breaking up the physical Internet, that's clearly bad, but having alternatives to the Facebook/Twitter/etc monolith would be a clear net-win.

guram11 6y ago

even government of sovereign states are afraid of being cancelled too the big techs have brought this upon themselves, their social media has become the battleground for narratives using propaganda and political correctness, these "fact check"(censorship) will only get uglier