5 ms·

Sens. Warren and Graham to Introduce Digital Consumer Protection Commission Act

rollinDyno 3y ago
From the Warren and Graham opinion piece on NYT: > Our Digital Consumer Protection Commission Act would create an independent, bipartisan regulator charged with licensing and policing the nation’s biggest tech companies — like Meta, Google and Amazon — to prevent online harm, promote free speech and competition, guard Americans’ privacy and protect national security. The new watchdog would focus on the unique threats posed by tech giants while strengthening the tools available to the federal agencies and state attorneys general who have authority to regulate Big Tech. I'd like to see the actual language of the bill. For now, in these public-facing articles, it seems as if the scope is too borad. For instance, what is 'Big Tech'? I'm also concerned about an agency responsible for 'unique threats'. While it's loable that there'll be an agency in charge of addressing the universe of threats that are not within the purview of any other government agency, this could be easily abused.
- lockhouse 3y ago
  Correction, this will be abused.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- tamimio 3y ago
  >guard Americans’ privacy If that’s really the reason I have better suggestion, revoke patriot Act.
  - flangola7 3y ago
    The Patriot Act expired three years ago and wasn't renewed.
    - tamimio 3y ago
      Thanks, that’s correct, however, it got rebranded as Freedom Act, which is still effective until the end of this year. Most likely to be renewed too or another rebranding Act will hit the shelves.
- MR4D 3y ago
  Words that will be ignored in the actual implementation: - independent - bipartisan - biggest - promote - guard - unique - giants
lockhouse 3y ago
No thanks. This is a way to get Apple to bend to the intelligence communities will. Want to keep your “license” to be a big tech company? Give the FBI a back door so we can spy on you, I mean save the children and protect you from terrorists and white supremacists.
- tamimio 3y ago
  Basically yeah, and not just Apple, anything used by few hundreds of people will be considered “big tech”, so protocols, fediverse, operating systems, etc. will need to implement a back doors to check if the contents shared is licensed and adhering to whatever DRM they would have.
docmechanic 3y ago
The Register’s take: https://www.theregister.com/2023/07/27/us_lawmakers_propose_new_commission/?td=rt-3a https://www.theregister.com/2023/07/27/us_lawmakers_propose_...
pangolinja 3y ago
ah Lindsay Graham, the renown Ladybird collector.

From the Warren and Graham opinion piece on NYT: > Our Digital Consumer Protection Commission Act would create an independent, bipartisan regulator charged with licensing and policing the nation’s biggest tech companies — like Meta, Google and Amazon — to prevent online harm, promote free speech and competition, guard Americans’ privacy and protect national security. The new watchdog would focus on the unique threats posed by tech giants while strengthening the tools available to the federal agencies and state attorneys general who have authority to regulate Big Tech. I'd like to see the actual language of the bill. For now, in these public-facing articles, it seems as if the scope is too borad. For instance, what is 'Big Tech'? I'm also concerned about an agency responsible for 'unique threats'. While it's loable that there'll be an agency in charge of addressing the universe of threats that are not within the purview of any other government agency, this could be easily abused.

lockhouse 3y ago
Correction, this will be abused.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
tamimio 3y ago
>guard Americans’ privacy If that’s really the reason I have better suggestion, revoke patriot Act.
- flangola7 3y ago
  The Patriot Act expired three years ago and wasn't renewed.
  - tamimio 3y ago
    Thanks, that’s correct, however, it got rebranded as Freedom Act, which is still effective until the end of this year. Most likely to be renewed too or another rebranding Act will hit the shelves.
MR4D 3y ago
Words that will be ignored in the actual implementation: - independent - bipartisan - biggest - promote - guard - unique - giants

lockhouse 3y ago

No thanks. This is a way to get Apple to bend to the intelligence communities will. Want to keep your “license” to be a big tech company? Give the FBI a back door so we can spy on you, I mean save the children and protect you from terrorists and white supremacists.

tamimio 3y ago
Basically yeah, and not just Apple, anything used by few hundreds of people will be considered “big tech”, so protocols, fediverse, operating systems, etc. will need to implement a back doors to check if the contents shared is licensed and adhering to whatever DRM they would have.

docmechanic 3y ago

The Register’s take: https://www.theregister.com/2023/07/27/us_lawmakers_propose_new_commission/?td=rt-3a https://www.theregister.com/2023/07/27/us_lawmakers_propose_...

pangolinja 3y ago

ah Lindsay Graham, the renown Ladybird collector.