4 ms·
Can they perhaps start by jailing execs for crimes that their companies are actively committing? That rarely gets them more than a slap on the wrist, but now fa
by mcv 4y ago
Can they perhaps start by jailing execs for crimes that their companies are actively committing? That rarely gets them more than a slap on the wrist, but now failing to do something poorly defined is going to land them in jail?
- luckylion 4y agoHey, if you want to go after that company dumping sewage into the river, just have a child visit their website and get a tracking cookie and send in the cops to get them to stop stalking minors.
- thinking4real 4y agoLol that would happen if they were actually concerned with exec/elite behavior. This is not about protecting children. This is about clamping down on civilian rights to control the internet and indeed, civilian ability to communicate freely. If children are being harmed (and they are, more than we’d like to imagine), the answer is simple: shut down social media. Seriously. Yes we’d lose time wasting places like this. Yes we wouldn’t be as tuned into media ongoings. I’m sure many here will chime in to say how HN or similar has saved their life. Don’t care, social media isn’t more important than the health of our children. And these companies have shown they don’t care and that profit is more important. Thus, they needn’t exist. But that won’t ever even be on the table. Because they don’t give a flying fuck about children. They want profits and control.
- substation13 4y agoIndeed. This is coming from the same people who dragged their feet on expanding free school meals until it become politically untenable.
- valdiorn 4y ago> This is about clamping down on civilian rights to control the internet and indeed, civilian ability to communicate freely. You're giving them way too much credit. MPs are not evil geniuses, they're highly motivated self absorbed politicians with no understanding of the internet, but the one thing they understand is that "protect the children" and "blame internet for bad stuff" is great for their career and ballot count. Trying to oppose this will get you a soundbite on the evening news with the headline "Tory MP defends online suicide porn". Good luck bouncing back from that.
- computronus 4y agoIt's interesting to think about "jailing" an entire company for its crimes. After all, in some legal (US) ways, a corporation is considered a person. If a company is found guilty of committing some crime, penalize it in an analogous way to a human. For example, if a person guilty of X ends up in jail for 30 days, a company guilty of X ends up ... here I'm not sure. Barred from doing business at all for 30 days? Forbidden from communicating with its customers? Cut off from, say, paying its employees? All things an imprisoned human would be unable to do themselves. I can't tell if the idea makes much sense, but there's a symmetry there, specifically around the personhood of corporations.
- birdyrooster 4y agoBusinesses have been run from the confines of prisons, so I think the analog is all of the employees at the corporation must live and work from jail for the next 30 days.
- jgeada 4y agoMight be easier to just jail the employees with real decision making authority. Most companies I know that is a very small subset, most everyone else is just supposed to do what they're told.
- birdyrooster 4y agoI am not sure "I was just following orders" is a great defense to keep you out of jail.
- jgeada 4y agoI don't disagree, but have noticed that the American justice system seems to obsess on jailing/punishing the people following the orders and completely ignores or treats very gently the people making the decisions and giving those orders. No rules for the rich and powerful, draconian rules for everyone else.
- 4y ago