4 ms·
If you look at any legislation that’s been proposed to address this, in the EU or anywhere else, it hasn’t been anything that’s going to make the situation any
by AmericanChopper 6y ago
If you look at any legislation that’s been proposed to address this, in the EU or anywhere else, it hasn’t been anything that’s going to make the situation any better. Lots of governments around the world are very upset that these cartels have the ability to restrict people’s access to the internet without any oversight or due process. But that’s not because they think it’s harmful for peoples access to these services to be taken away without any oversight or due process, they just want to be the ones wielding that power.
- golemiprague 6y agoThey should be the ones wielding the power because they are elected and if we don't like their decision we can vote someone else in, we don't have any right to vote who runs Google. The whole thing is a slippery slope started by the left which they still support. Hopefully it will all crumble the same way the USSR did, but it might take time.
- throwdbaaway 6y agoExactly. If a chat service is banned in some authoritarian countries, that's the strongest signal that it is indeed secure.
- AmericanChopper 6y agoWidely recognized “authoritarian” countries are hardly the issue here. Western democracies have been trying to usurp this power from the tech cartels for quite a while now. “Hate speech” laws have been successfully normalized in many countries already. The latest push has been to legally regulate “misinformation”. The EU has already started the process of establishing a government authority to regulate the truth. Then again, they’ve been trying to ban E2EE for years as well, so perhaps authoritarianism is the issue...
- petre 6y agoI'm not talking about acces to the internet but about app store monopoly. It's similar with MS shipping IE bundled with Windows for which they got fined.