3 ms·

While most people on HN would agree that they would like more regulation of their data on FB and Google, these are largely still separate actors from the US gov

by pempem 4y ago

While most people on HN would agree that they would like more regulation of their data on FB and Google, these are largely still separate actors from the US government. You can even indicate that something like Cambridge Analytica is starting within a party, rather than the actual governing body. There is too much sharing, IMO, without a doubt. That being said, they are not near synonymous as TikTok is. Data regulation, privacy, influence through exposure are real issues worldwide. Tiktok has a raised profile due to its closeness with a governing state body.

Al-Khwarizmi 4y ago
The thing is that "government = bad" is typical American mindset. As another non-US, non-Chinese citizen, the fact that those megacorporations are independent from the government makes it worse, not better. At least governments respond to their people (especially in the case of democracies, much less so for authoritarian governments, but they still have to worry a minimum to avoid revolution). Corporations respond to profit only, everything else be damned.
- bko 4y ago
  When Facebook starts opening concentration camps, I'm likely to agree with you. > especially in the case of democracies, much less so for authoritarian governments, but they still have to worry a minimum to avoid revolution What do you think is more likely to still be relevant in 100 years from now, China or Facebook? I think a 'revolution' is more likely to affect Facebook than China
  - echaozh 4y ago
    Hmm, you know corporations can run prisons, and they can fight in wars with mercenaries.
  - formerkrogemp 4y ago
    > When Facebook starts opening concentration camps, I'm likely to agree with you I wonder. If your product is used to recruit soldiers, spread propaganda, disseminate hate speech, and organize and deploy said concentration camps or their equivalent, are you liable and culpable? If you've known for years and done next to nothing about sectarian violence and genocide, are you still blameless? When moderation could have been hired and trained for an immaterial amount of profit? SEA wages are notoriously low in dollar terms. Poorly implemented machine learning models don't suffice to halt genocide. Greed, ignorance, malevolence, sloth, arrogance. Take your pick. https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/kill-facebook-fails-detect-hate-rohingya-83576729 https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/kill-facebook-fail... https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/digital-threats/rohingya-facebook-hate-speech/ https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/digital-threats/r... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebook-genocide.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebo...
- dnissley 4y ago
  If a security hole was found in Google and in the US government, which do you think would respond in a way that would make that less likely to happen in the future?
- arroz 4y ago
  government is not always bad However government knowing about your private stuff is Homophobic governments shouldn’t know about gay peoples privacy Christian governments shouldn’t know about women’s abortion The government can help, it shouldn’t get in the way — which is very much what can do under a dictatorship
- pempem 4y ago
  I would strongly disagree It is not that government = bad. It is that government having data which allows for influence of people == destruction of democracy as the government is supposed to reflect the will of people rather than the other way around. It is an incredibly short path to: autocracy, oligarchies, dictatorships, etc.
alfiedotwtf 4y ago
> these are largely still separate actors from the US government Yes they're separate actors, but programs like PRISM suggest that they're still on a very short leash
- sneak 4y ago
  Not just PRISM: Apple has actually been (presumably) forced to not publish e2e encryption software that the feds didn't want deployed, an example of prior restraint that is blatantly unconstitutional. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusive/exclusive-apple-dropped-plan-for-encrypting-backups-after-fbi-complained-sources-idUSKBN1ZK1CT https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusiv...
  - pempem 4y ago
    Completely. So much of this framing however is being pushed/forced/rulings or judgement driven decisions. You get the sense that TikTok is like "cool, yeah, we'll add that to our roadmap"
Schroedingersat 4y ago
Just because the chinese oligarchs give themselves government titles and the US oligarchs do not is no reason to believe they're not the ones in control.
- pempem 4y ago
  Love this point. So true, and so accurate. That being said they are also highly disparate with a variety of motivations and are incredibly hard to whip (using this the way its used in congress) into directions that are nuanced. Things like "we wanna make more money" "regulations/unions are bad" ofc oligarchs in the US manage to see eye to eye on, but anything further nuanced - that class discipline - is harder to achieve in the US than China

by pempem 4y ago

Al-Khwarizmi 4y ago

The thing is that "government = bad" is typical American mindset. As another non-US, non-Chinese citizen, the fact that those megacorporations are independent from the government makes it worse, not better. At least governments respond to their people (especially in the case of democracies, much less so for authoritarian governments, but they still have to worry a minimum to avoid revolution). Corporations respond to profit only, everything else be damned.

bko 4y ago
When Facebook starts opening concentration camps, I'm likely to agree with you. > especially in the case of democracies, much less so for authoritarian governments, but they still have to worry a minimum to avoid revolution What do you think is more likely to still be relevant in 100 years from now, China or Facebook? I think a 'revolution' is more likely to affect Facebook than China
- echaozh 4y ago
  Hmm, you know corporations can run prisons, and they can fight in wars with mercenaries.
- formerkrogemp 4y ago
  > When Facebook starts opening concentration camps, I'm likely to agree with you I wonder. If your product is used to recruit soldiers, spread propaganda, disseminate hate speech, and organize and deploy said concentration camps or their equivalent, are you liable and culpable? If you've known for years and done next to nothing about sectarian violence and genocide, are you still blameless? When moderation could have been hired and trained for an immaterial amount of profit? SEA wages are notoriously low in dollar terms. Poorly implemented machine learning models don't suffice to halt genocide. Greed, ignorance, malevolence, sloth, arrogance. Take your pick. https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/kill-facebook-fails-detect-hate-rohingya-83576729 https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/kill-facebook-fail... https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/digital-threats/rohingya-facebook-hate-speech/ https://www.globalwitness.org/en/campaigns/digital-threats/r... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebook-genocide.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebo...
dnissley 4y ago
If a security hole was found in Google and in the US government, which do you think would respond in a way that would make that less likely to happen in the future?
arroz 4y ago
government is not always bad However government knowing about your private stuff is Homophobic governments shouldn’t know about gay peoples privacy Christian governments shouldn’t know about women’s abortion The government can help, it shouldn’t get in the way — which is very much what can do under a dictatorship
pempem 4y ago
I would strongly disagree It is not that government = bad. It is that government having data which allows for influence of people == destruction of democracy as the government is supposed to reflect the will of people rather than the other way around. It is an incredibly short path to: autocracy, oligarchies, dictatorships, etc.

alfiedotwtf 4y ago

> these are largely still separate actors from the US government Yes they're separate actors, but programs like PRISM suggest that they're still on a very short leash

sneak 4y ago
Not just PRISM: Apple has actually been (presumably) forced to not publish e2e encryption software that the feds didn't want deployed, an example of prior restraint that is blatantly unconstitutional. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusive/exclusive-apple-dropped-plan-for-encrypting-backups-after-fbi-complained-sources-idUSKBN1ZK1CT https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusiv...
- pempem 4y ago
  Completely. So much of this framing however is being pushed/forced/rulings or judgement driven decisions. You get the sense that TikTok is like "cool, yeah, we'll add that to our roadmap"

Schroedingersat 4y ago

Just because the chinese oligarchs give themselves government titles and the US oligarchs do not is no reason to believe they're not the ones in control.

pempem 4y ago
Love this point. So true, and so accurate. That being said they are also highly disparate with a variety of motivations and are incredibly hard to whip (using this the way its used in congress) into directions that are nuanced. Things like "we wanna make more money" "regulations/unions are bad" ofc oligarchs in the US manage to see eye to eye on, but anything further nuanced - that class discipline - is harder to achieve in the US than China