9 ms·

It is a stretch to call enforcing terms of service “government-like” rules and enforcement. This is like calling a restaurant hanging up a “no shirt, no shoes,

It is a stretch to call enforcing terms of service “government-like” rules and enforcement. This is like calling a restaurant hanging up a “no shirt, no shoes, no service” sign the same. And thus far I haven’t seen them issue fines or imprisonment over breaking their rules.

Engineering-MD 4y ago
It’s a continuum though. The restaurant example is limited scope and limited enforcement. Compare it instead to a school/university which does enforce code of conducts etc and suspends students. Similar with housing organisations.
- bombcar 4y ago
  And you already have it happening to businesses; companies such as payment processors effectively wield life/death decisions over many types of businesses, for better or for worse. Can Google or PayPal legally kill you? No, but there are many other types of punishment in the world than imprisonment or death.
skciva 4y ago
What happens when the terms of service change in real time? When you try to contact someone and you're met with a void? When your livelihood is tied to a platform that decides to shut down? When an algorithm determines you're a threat or you're not allowed to cross a boarder? Tech is integrating itself into daily life every day, for better and for worse. Leaders in the space need to slow down and realize the havoc they wreck when they "move fast and break things." As someone on HN you're likely privy to how to navigate these waters. Everyday people are buying into whatever they're being sold (because why wouldn't they when they've basically got no viable alternatives) from tech and then being left empty handed when the VCs and leaders get their payouts and move on to what ever shiny object they spot on the horizon. If you or your family and friends haven't been on the receiving end of fines or imprisonment due to technology consider yourself lucky and diversify your community.
- divided 4y ago
  I’m interested in examples of where breaking a company’s rules has led to fines or imprisonment—particularly ones _enforced_ by the tech monopoly—that didn’t also involve breaking laws. Not talking about the flaws in technology (your example of misidentification for instance). You may just be making a separate point, but my response was in regards to the sentiment of its parent. Your other comments I agree with, but the root cause isn’t government-like rules and enforcement; but rather government-like services being owned by broadly unregulated private entities.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    The closest at this time would be PayPal freezing/seizing accounts that are "in violation of the terms and conditions" - there are various stories around it. A government is more than just the entity that can fine/imprison you.
    - divided 4y ago
      Right, they can. Undoubtedly kicking someone off a private platform can cause them harm, sometimes significant harm. We agree there. Where I disagree is the term goverment-like enforcement implies more than de-platforming. Seizing assets is closer, but banks and apartments and landlords have seized assets for hundreds (thousands?) of years. It would also be a stretch to call rules and enforcements of those rules by banks, apartments, and landlords government-like. These tech monopoly rules and enforcement don’t seem outside the norm for a private entity. I don’t disagree that the scale of the companies present problems that need to be addressed. But businesses having rules and enforcing them are not problems alone.

Engineering-MD 4y ago

It’s a continuum though. The restaurant example is limited scope and limited enforcement. Compare it instead to a school/university which does enforce code of conducts etc and suspends students. Similar with housing organisations.

bombcar 4y ago
And you already have it happening to businesses; companies such as payment processors effectively wield life/death decisions over many types of businesses, for better or for worse. Can Google or PayPal legally kill you? No, but there are many other types of punishment in the world than imprisonment or death.

skciva 4y ago

What happens when the terms of service change in real time? When you try to contact someone and you're met with a void? When your livelihood is tied to a platform that decides to shut down? When an algorithm determines you're a threat or you're not allowed to cross a boarder? Tech is integrating itself into daily life every day, for better and for worse. Leaders in the space need to slow down and realize the havoc they wreck when they "move fast and break things." As someone on HN you're likely privy to how to navigate these waters. Everyday people are buying into whatever they're being sold (because why wouldn't they when they've basically got no viable alternatives) from tech and then being left empty handed when the VCs and leaders get their payouts and move on to what ever shiny object they spot on the horizon. If you or your family and friends haven't been on the receiving end of fines or imprisonment due to technology consider yourself lucky and diversify your community.

divided 4y ago
I’m interested in examples of where breaking a company’s rules has led to fines or imprisonment—particularly ones _enforced_ by the tech monopoly—that didn’t also involve breaking laws. Not talking about the flaws in technology (your example of misidentification for instance). You may just be making a separate point, but my response was in regards to the sentiment of its parent. Your other comments I agree with, but the root cause isn’t government-like rules and enforcement; but rather government-like services being owned by broadly unregulated private entities.
- bombcar 4y ago
  The closest at this time would be PayPal freezing/seizing accounts that are "in violation of the terms and conditions" - there are various stories around it. A government is more than just the entity that can fine/imprison you.
  - divided 4y ago
    Right, they can. Undoubtedly kicking someone off a private platform can cause them harm, sometimes significant harm. We agree there. Where I disagree is the term goverment-like enforcement implies more than de-platforming. Seizing assets is closer, but banks and apartments and landlords have seized assets for hundreds (thousands?) of years. It would also be a stretch to call rules and enforcements of those rules by banks, apartments, and landlords government-like. These tech monopoly rules and enforcement don’t seem outside the norm for a private entity. I don’t disagree that the scale of the companies present problems that need to be addressed. But businesses having rules and enforcing them are not problems alone.