6 ms·

I can understand them going after Ag and Pharma in a big way, but I'm skeptical about the Tech part. There is just too much to lose in political support from th

I can understand them going after Ag and Pharma in a big way, but I'm skeptical about the Tech part. There is just too much to lose in political support from that industry for any politician to attack them too aggressively.

postpawl 5y ago
Even in 2019, 2/3 of Americans supported breaking up big tech companies: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/18/20870938/break-up-big-tech-google-facebook-amazon-poll https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/18/20870938/b... The political support is definitely there. But if you’re talking about rich Silicon Valley donors, yeah they might have a problem with it.
ardit33 5y ago
I think for tech, the forks/knifes are out from both parties, for different reasons. As for the other industries, I am much more skeptical anything significant will be done. This administration as pushed lots of 'agendas' just for political show even though it new it had 0 chance for them to pass and wasting everybody's time. Time will tell if this is just another political show, or they will actually accomplish anything.
throwawayboise 5y ago
Isn't that exactly the reason they should be attacked?
FractalHQ 5y ago
I hope it’s real. We need modern anti trust laws, big tech is out of control. You’re right though.. sadly. Most importantly, we need to get money out of politics to free our government from the grips of these corporate conglomerates.
- dkdk8283 5y ago
  We must free ourselves from censorship.
  - seattle_spring 5y ago
    Moderation is not censorship.
    - thoughtstheseus 5y ago
      If there is no viable alternative then it’s censorship. Put the power of moderation in the hands of people, create a market for it, that’s a winning strategy.
      - seattle_spring 5y ago
        What are some of your opinions that can't be shared freely on at least some platforms? "Conservative opinions" don't count, because if they were actually censored then I wouldn't have to have them rammed down my throat every minute of every day from every angle.
  - worik 5y ago
    Clearly you are suffering a lot from censorship...
boomboomsubban 5y ago
Both health and agriculture have huge lobbying budgets, I'm skeptical that tech offers much more political support than the other two.
deregulateMed 5y ago
What does Ag do? "Efficiency Is Everything" eats for $500/year. Compare that to medical which is a minimum of a few thousand dollars a year if you are perfectly healthy and $20000 if you have a 1 day stay at a hospital.
- colordrops 5y ago
  Big Ag is responsible for horrible factory farming practices growing the wrong crops and producing food lacking nutrients while destroying the environment and torturing animals. They take huge subsidies and use them to support these unsustainable practices.
  - arrosenberg 5y ago
    Not to mention the fragile state of supply chains for food, the food deserts, absurd water usage.
    - heavyset_go 5y ago
      The fact that one of the largest famines in the Western world as of late was caused by an economic system that led to people relying on monoculture crops to feed themselves[1], the fact that ours results in monocultures, as well, should be worrying. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)#Causes_and_contributing_factors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)#Causes_...
  - s1artibartfast 5y ago
    What part of that is big ag, opposed to ag in general. I don't see the difference on those topics personally.
    - worik 5y ago
      Economies of scale, when viewed from the perspective of a cattle beast in a feed lot are a horrible thing in agriculture. Modern industrial agriculture with its expensive inputs, ruination of land, and abuse of live stock is a quite horrifying thing and is impoverishing the people responsible for the base of our food supply. It is the most efficient in terms of output per input, but not by most other measures.
AnimalMuppet 5y ago
But, see, if I'm a politician, it's exactly "there is just too much to lose in political support from that industry" that worries me. I've seen how much weight they can throw against a politician they don't like; I've seen them decide to go from "not throwing that weight" to "throwing that weight" very abruptly; and I realize that such a move can be made against me at the drop of a hat. That would worry me. Would it worry me enough for me to risk triggering their wrath right now? I don't know. As a non-politician, here's what I think needs to happen. They either need broken up, or they need heavily regulated. (We didn't break up the power companies. But we did create the Public Service Commissions to heavily regulate them.) I could see a Public Network Committee or something, saying: "No, you can't make that change your UI to make it even more addictive. No, you can't gouge advertisers. No, you can't directly sell personal information..."
- fallingknife 5y ago
  The Republicans will never go this route because of the risk it would work and be used on other industries. The Democrats will never go for this because it would open up social media to 1st amendment claims which would prevent the censorship they depend on.

postpawl 5y ago

Even in 2019, 2/3 of Americans supported breaking up big tech companies: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/18/20870938/break-up-big-tech-google-facebook-amazon-poll https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/18/20870938/b... The political support is definitely there. But if you’re talking about rich Silicon Valley donors, yeah they might have a problem with it.

ardit33 5y ago

I think for tech, the forks/knifes are out from both parties, for different reasons. As for the other industries, I am much more skeptical anything significant will be done. This administration as pushed lots of 'agendas' just for political show even though it new it had 0 chance for them to pass and wasting everybody's time. Time will tell if this is just another political show, or they will actually accomplish anything.

throwawayboise 5y ago

Isn't that exactly the reason they should be attacked?

FractalHQ 5y ago

I hope it’s real. We need modern anti trust laws, big tech is out of control. You’re right though.. sadly. Most importantly, we need to get money out of politics to free our government from the grips of these corporate conglomerates.

dkdk8283 5y ago
We must free ourselves from censorship.
- seattle_spring 5y ago
  Moderation is not censorship.
  - thoughtstheseus 5y ago
    If there is no viable alternative then it’s censorship. Put the power of moderation in the hands of people, create a market for it, that’s a winning strategy.
    - seattle_spring 5y ago
      What are some of your opinions that can't be shared freely on at least some platforms? "Conservative opinions" don't count, because if they were actually censored then I wouldn't have to have them rammed down my throat every minute of every day from every angle.
- worik 5y ago
  Clearly you are suffering a lot from censorship...

boomboomsubban 5y ago

Both health and agriculture have huge lobbying budgets, I'm skeptical that tech offers much more political support than the other two.

deregulateMed 5y ago

What does Ag do? "Efficiency Is Everything" eats for $500/year. Compare that to medical which is a minimum of a few thousand dollars a year if you are perfectly healthy and $20000 if you have a 1 day stay at a hospital.

colordrops 5y ago
Big Ag is responsible for horrible factory farming practices growing the wrong crops and producing food lacking nutrients while destroying the environment and torturing animals. They take huge subsidies and use them to support these unsustainable practices.
- arrosenberg 5y ago
  Not to mention the fragile state of supply chains for food, the food deserts, absurd water usage.
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    The fact that one of the largest famines in the Western world as of late was caused by an economic system that led to people relying on monoculture crops to feed themselves[1], the fact that ours results in monocultures, as well, should be worrying. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)#Causes_and_contributing_factors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)#Causes_...
- s1artibartfast 5y ago
  What part of that is big ag, opposed to ag in general. I don't see the difference on those topics personally.
  - worik 5y ago
    Economies of scale, when viewed from the perspective of a cattle beast in a feed lot are a horrible thing in agriculture. Modern industrial agriculture with its expensive inputs, ruination of land, and abuse of live stock is a quite horrifying thing and is impoverishing the people responsible for the base of our food supply. It is the most efficient in terms of output per input, but not by most other measures.

AnimalMuppet 5y ago

But, see, if I'm a politician, it's exactly "there is just too much to lose in political support from that industry" that worries me. I've seen how much weight they can throw against a politician they don't like; I've seen them decide to go from "not throwing that weight" to "throwing that weight" very abruptly; and I realize that such a move can be made against me at the drop of a hat. That would worry me. Would it worry me enough for me to risk triggering their wrath right now? I don't know. As a non-politician, here's what I think needs to happen. They either need broken up, or they need heavily regulated. (We didn't break up the power companies. But we did create the Public Service Commissions to heavily regulate them.) I could see a Public Network Committee or something, saying: "No, you can't make that change your UI to make it even more addictive. No, you can't gouge advertisers. No, you can't directly sell personal information..."

fallingknife 5y ago
The Republicans will never go this route because of the risk it would work and be used on other industries. The Democrats will never go for this because it would open up social media to 1st amendment claims which would prevent the censorship they depend on.