3 ms·
This is not a Whataboutism. I didn't raise a counter accusation, I said Facebook + others should be looked into - not only Facebook. > but if you've got three
by tchalla 5y ago
This is not a Whataboutism. I didn't raise a counter accusation, I said Facebook + others should be looked into - not only Facebook.
> but if you've got three broken companies and you fix one of them, you've now only got two broken companies to fix.
Now, we've to somehow decide the order. I say with start at Amazon, the parent will say Facebook and someone else will say Apple. We are back to square one. Therefore, my suggestion was to take uniform and consistent action. Not, go after one organisation because of popularity.
- 8note 5y agoYour suggestion reads like you want to stop progress on Facebook because you'd prefer amazon to be looked at first. Unless your suggestion is to do them all simultaneously? But then who's going to synchronize all the hearings to make sure all the judges hit their gavels at the same time? And if one company stalls, won't that stop any action on any of them?
- tchalla 5y ago> Your suggestion reads like you want to stop progress on Facebook because you'd prefer amazon to be looked at first. That wasn't my suggestion, really. The parent comment said that "We should start at Facebook". I facetiously said, "We can also start at Amazon or Apple". > Unless your suggestion is to do them all simultaneously? But then who's going to synchronize all the hearings to make sure all the judges hit their gavels at the same time? And if one company stalls, won't that stop any action on any of them? Good questions! What's your solution?
- blowski 5y agoMine would be to start somewhere, anywhere, and get momentum behind it. Fix at least one company (ideally more), fix the people who benefit from the current system, and fix the system itself. It's a ton of work, but since it's one of the biggest global issues right now, I'm sure we can resource it.