3 ms·
> The kind of power wielded by tech companies is not the same kind of power wielded by the police. Police and Law Enforcement salivate at the data and control
by vuln 4y ago
> The kind of power wielded by tech companies is not the same kind of power wielded by the police.
Police and Law Enforcement salivate at the data and control Social Media/Tech companies have.
One could look to the twitter files to see how much the US government attempted and successfully controlled a public company to push narratives of the current regime and or censor dissenting views.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Files https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_Files
Some tinfoils out there belief the Facebook (now Facebook) was originally LifeLog.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_LifeLog https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DARPA_LifeLog
The US gov and LEO have made social media a _national security issue_ which gives the government inferred power to abuse the data collected by these companies.
- haswell 4y ago> Police and Law Enforcement salivate at the data and control Social Media/Tech companies have. Of course they do, but the core point remains: the kind of power wielded is not the same. Pinterest can’t show up at your door with guns based on the things you pin. The reason police salivate is because of the possibilities unlocked by having such data while also being “the law”. I’m in no way claiming that this power is not dangerous for other reasons in the hands of tech companies, but tech having this data means something entirely different than LEO having this data. The implications and failure modes are quite different and worthy of examination.
- vuln 4y agoSorry I guess I'm not keeping up. If tech has the data, law enforcement has access to said data. Simple as.
- ofchnofc 4y ago[dead]
- CatWChainsaw 4y agoLaw enforcement has a mandate and "lawful" monopoly on violence. Pinterest does not. A private citizen acting as a vigilante does not.