johnnyYen

6 ms·

1.
by johnnyYen 3y ago
and yet Greenland is gaining ice https://electroverse.info/how-the-greenland-ice-sheet-really... https://electroverse.info/increases-in-polar-bear-population...
2.
by johnnyYen 6y ago
I think you are mis-understanding what the news organisations source of business is. It's NOT the consumers of news, and never was. It's the advertising companies who place ads on the news organisations properties - and now the ne
3.
by johnnyYen 6y ago
"Facebook didn't bat an eye before blocking the pages of food banks and emergency service providers..." No, FB obeyed the law. The legislation of what constitutes a "news organisation" is opaque. The legislation sai
4.
by johnnyYen 6y ago
I'd think Google could easily get around this by limiting the frequency with which their GoogleBot visits News Corp web sites to, say, once a month. Effectively makes being indexed worthless for News Corp.
5.
by johnnyYen 6y ago
The ACCC response if disingenuous. It fails to mention the requirement that Google and FB must give news entities 28 days of any changes to their ranking algorithm. I mean WTF. It's the most brain dead piece of legislation you could im
6.
by johnnyYen 6y ago
I was referring to your reference [1]. The AU government wants to give private media a leg up, but won't allow the ABC (or SBS) to receive any moneys from Google/FB, and at the same time regularly cuts funds to both the government
7.
by johnnyYen 6y ago
Ironic you should reference the ABC when the legislation specifically excludes the ABC from any benefit other "registered news organisations" may enjoy.
8.
by johnnyYen 6y ago
Seems like massive legislative over-reach. 1.100 Discrimination in this context will be considered to occur if the news content of a registered news business is disadvantaged incomparison to other news content in terms of the crawling, inde