Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[Cambridge Analytica], [Facebook], and Data Security.

1293032343538

Posts

  • milskimilski Their Will comes, at last, to Earth, to the Neath, as a storm crosses the sea. Registered User regular
    Facebook, Google, Twitter, Youtube (Yes I know Google) and Instagram all need to be regulated as utilities.

    Nah, this is the line Nazis use to say they shouldn't be able to remove Nazi content.

    High, cold, eternal, immobile, minuscule. You endure; you burn.
    AngelHedgieCelestialBadger
  • Marty81Marty81 Registered User regular
    discrider wrote: »
    ...
    What stops investors that own 51% of Facebook demanding Zuckerburg listen to them or they force liquidation of Facebook?
    Am I right in thinking the multi-tier system just means Zuckerburg has outsized voting power with respect to his actual share in the company?

    I'm not really seeing how a tiered structure couldn't be defeated by the actual majority shareholder, or seeing how a tiered structure is anything other than a problem the shareholders have gladly bought themselves into.

    Can't force liquidation if you don't have 51% of the vote.

    Can't do shit if you don't have 51% of the vote.

    OrcaMoridin889
  • JragghenJragghen Registered User regular
    Jephery wrote: »
    Zuckerberg is a walking stereotype in terms of being a really smart engineer who thinks that all of life's problems are as easily solvable as writing a program, if only everyone else would get out of his way and stop being so stupid.

    See also: libertarians

    I've had programmers remark that if programmers wrote the law, it would be less full of loopholes.

    And I'm just like "wtf our code is awful and full of bugs constantly."

    The one thing from programming I want to see translated to law: git.

    Revision history, logs of who changed what, the whole nine yards.

    ....I wonder if someone could write a compiler for legal code which would make the slightest bit of sense.

    Marty81Polaritiedispatch.oZilla360kimeDedwrekkaOghulkGONG-00Man in the Mists
  • DoodmannDoodmann Registered User regular
    Jragghen wrote: »
    Jephery wrote: »
    Zuckerberg is a walking stereotype in terms of being a really smart engineer who thinks that all of life's problems are as easily solvable as writing a program, if only everyone else would get out of his way and stop being so stupid.

    See also: libertarians

    I've had programmers remark that if programmers wrote the law, it would be less full of loopholes.

    And I'm just like "wtf our code is awful and full of bugs constantly."

    The one thing from programming I want to see translated to law: git.

    Revision history, logs of who changed what, the whole nine yards.

    ....I wonder if someone could write a compiler for legal code which would make the slightest bit of sense.

    so give it a wikipedia like backbone?

    Whippy wrote: »
    nope nope nope nope abort abort talk about anime
    Torchlight | Steam | ART
    Zilla360
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular
    milski wrote: »
    Facebook, Google, Twitter, Youtube (Yes I know Google) and Instagram all need to be regulated as utilities.

    Nah, this is the line Nazis use to say they shouldn't be able to remove Nazi content.

    I certainly don't think they should be regulated as utilities, but its tough to think about how you SHOULD be able to regulate things.

    Take something which exists in some countries, the right to be forgotten online. Should facebook be obliged to utterly eradicate all record of an action I took if I want it gone and its more than 10 years old or something? Should google be obliged to de-index it?

    Do we value a record of the past (so, for example we can see if someone was a sexist and mysoginist bastard when they were 22) or do we value your ability to escape it and move beyond it (so that that same sexist bastard who is now 42 can put the transgressions of their youth behind them now that they have been a well behaved and decent person for more than a decade)

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • khainkhain Registered User regular
    edited November 2018
    discrider wrote: »
    ...
    What stops investors that own 51% of Facebook demanding Zuckerburg listen to them or they force liquidation of Facebook?
    Am I right in thinking the multi-tier system just means Zuckerburg has outsized voting power with respect to his actual share in the company?

    I'm not really seeing how a tiered structure couldn't be defeated by the actual majority shareholder, or seeing how a tiered structure is anything other than a problem the shareholders have gladly bought themselves into.

    It doesn't matter if someone owns 51% of the stock because that doesn't translate to 51% of the voting rights. Zuckerberg alone controls about 60% of the voting rights of Facebook and another 10% is controlled by a small group of insiders. Collectively they own about 18% of the stock while having 70% of the voting rights.

    It's arguable who's fault this is, but I think it's telling that the NYSE has said that stocks with a dual tier structure will no longer be allowed in indicies. The other side of this argument would be that a buying a stock in these types of companies is making a bet on the founder.

    khain on
    Fencingsax
  • PhyphorPhyphor Building Planet Busters Tasting FruitRegistered User regular
    Marty81 wrote: »
    discrider wrote: »
    ...
    What stops investors that own 51% of Facebook demanding Zuckerburg listen to them or they force liquidation of Facebook?
    Am I right in thinking the multi-tier system just means Zuckerburg has outsized voting power with respect to his actual share in the company?

    I'm not really seeing how a tiered structure couldn't be defeated by the actual majority shareholder, or seeing how a tiered structure is anything other than a problem the shareholders have gladly bought themselves into.

    Can't force liquidation if you don't have 51% of the vote.

    Can't do shit if you don't have 51% of the vote.

    Liquidation also wouldn't give you much money as the stock isn't priced solely on assets (note this would literally involve all your data being sold off to the highest bidder)

    Magic Box
    Academician Prokhor "Phyphor" Zakharov, Chief Scientist of China, Provost of the University of Planet - SE++ Megagame
  • InfidelInfidel Heretic Registered User regular
    khain wrote: »
    discrider wrote: »
    ...
    What stops investors that own 51% of Facebook demanding Zuckerburg listen to them or they force liquidation of Facebook?
    Am I right in thinking the multi-tier system just means Zuckerburg has outsized voting power with respect to his actual share in the company?

    I'm not really seeing how a tiered structure couldn't be defeated by the actual majority shareholder, or seeing how a tiered structure is anything other than a problem the shareholders have gladly bought themselves into.

    It doesn't matter if someone owns 51% of the stock because that doesn't translate to 51% of the voting rights. Zuckerberg alone controls about 60% of the voting rights of Facebook and another 10% is controlled by a small group of insiders. Collectively they own about 18% of the stock while having 70% of the voting rights.

    It's arguable who's fault this is, but I think it's telling that the NYSE has said that stocks with a dual tier structure will no longer be allowed in indicies. The other side of this argument would be that a buying a stock in these types of companies is making a bet on the founder.

    Also the amount of control required is up to whatever was agreed upon for whatever type of event it is.

    If you agree to "must be unanimous, only my votes count" then that's what happens.

    OrokosPA.png
    Play D&D 4e? :: Check out Orokos and upload your Character Builder sheet! :: Orokos Dice Roller
    The PhalLounge :: Chat board for Critical Failures IRC! :: #CriticalFailures and #mafia on irc.slashnet.org
  • grumblethorngrumblethorn Registered User regular
    milski wrote: »
    Facebook, Google, Twitter, Youtube (Yes I know Google) and Instagram all need to be regulated as utilities.

    Nah, this is the line Nazis use to say they shouldn't be able to remove Nazi content.

    Godwin in 1. Bravo.

  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    milski wrote: »
    Facebook, Google, Twitter, Youtube (Yes I know Google) and Instagram all need to be regulated as utilities.

    Nah, this is the line Nazis use to say they shouldn't be able to remove Nazi content.

    Godwin in 1. Bravo.

    This is like page 32 it barely counts :P

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    milski wrote: »
    Facebook, Google, Twitter, Youtube (Yes I know Google) and Instagram all need to be regulated as utilities.

    Nah, this is the line Nazis use to say they shouldn't be able to remove Nazi content.

    Godwin in 1. Bravo.

    So, what you're saying is that you don't actually have an argument, just a rote truism that the person it's named for has conceded doesn't work anymore in our current society.

    Because the reason you see the argument that online services should be run in a "neutral" manner is because there's a contingent that has started to face opprobrium for their conduct where they haven't before, and instead of examining why that is the case, they want to go back to where their behavior wasn't held against them.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    shrykeKamarmilskiYoutubeMan in the Mists
  • HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    If Facebook was a public utility, then the same laws and protections that apply to speach in the public square should apply to it. Which would probably be less restrictive on Nazis than Facebook's current policies.

    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
    CouscousMvrckJulius
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    If Facebook was a public utility, then the same laws and protections that apply to speach in the public square should apply to it. Which would probably be less restrictive on Nazis than Facebook's current policies.

    Dude no, if somebody did half the harassment that Nazi do on facebook in a public square, they would be fined, arrested and removed by the cops before you could say "nazi war crimes for 500 alex"!

    The level of vitriol and hate on Facebook is way higher then what we would allow in any public setting, routinely reaching death threats and systemic stalking. The only reason more people are not jailed for it is because Facebook is uncooperative, making it hard to document it and track down the real world location of the Nazis.

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
    discriderMoridin889MrVyngaardMan in the Mists
  • XaquinXaquin Right behind you!Registered User regular
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    If Facebook was a public utility, then the same laws and protections that apply to speach in the public square should apply to it. Which would probably be less restrictive on Nazis than Facebook's current policies.

    Dude no, if somebody did half the harassment that Nazi do on facebook in a public square, they would be fined, arrested and removed by the cops before you could say "nazi war crimes for 500 alex"!

    The level of vitriol and hate on Facebook is way higher then what we would allow in any public setting, routinely reaching death threats and systemic stalking. The only reason more people are not jailed for it is because Facebook is uncooperative, making it hard to document it and track down the real world location of the Nazis.

    not really

    see: Charlottesville, WBC, and the literal KKK (that are still around and active!)

    Youtube
  • Kipling217Kipling217 Registered User regular
    Xaquin wrote: »
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    If Facebook was a public utility, then the same laws and protections that apply to speach in the public square should apply to it. Which would probably be less restrictive on Nazis than Facebook's current policies.

    Dude no, if somebody did half the harassment that Nazi do on facebook in a public square, they would be fined, arrested and removed by the cops before you could say "nazi war crimes for 500 alex"!

    The level of vitriol and hate on Facebook is way higher then what we would allow in any public setting, routinely reaching death threats and systemic stalking. The only reason more people are not jailed for it is because Facebook is uncooperative, making it hard to document it and track down the real world location of the Nazis.

    not really

    see: Charlottesville, WBC, and the literal KKK (that are still around and active!)

    Exceptions to the general rule. The KKK for instance was a terrorist organisation supported by several state and local governments(and vice versa).

    Charlottesville was a huge fuckup by the local authorities, failing to prepare for a major public confrontation, allowing it to escalate into violence. No events after that have been allowed to get out of control, with cops outnumbering the Alt Right at several of their protest.

    As for WBC, they are more of a moneymaking scam then a hate group(though they are still a hate group). Most of their money comes from suing people that even touch them. Their slogans and chants are even set up so that they are just on the edge of threatening speech. Its why their posters says God hates Fags instead of I want to kill gays.

    Communicating from the last of the Babylon Stations.
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    If Facebook was a public utility, then the same laws and protections that apply to speach in the public square should apply to it. Which would probably be less restrictive on Nazis than Facebook's current policies.

    Dude no, if somebody did half the harassment that Nazi do on facebook in a public square, they would be fined, arrested and removed by the cops before you could say "nazi war crimes for 500 alex"!

    The level of vitriol and hate on Facebook is way higher then what we would allow in any public setting, routinely reaching death threats and systemic stalking. The only reason more people are not jailed for it is because Facebook is uncooperative, making it hard to document it and track down the real world location of the Nazis.

    We live in a society where allowing Nazis to openly march in force through a heavily Jewish community is treated as an emblem of how free our society is. Death threats and stalking are routinely played down and treated unseriously, with tragic results.

    You would be surprised (and horrified) at what gets allowed in public discourse.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    XaquinshrykeMrVyngaardmilskiYoutube
  • TryCatcherTryCatcher Registered User regular
    Got to ask, how Facebook should be treated then? Because part of this dispute is that for decades, content providers dodged lawsuits by hiding behind Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
    No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

    Aka "our users are content providers, so we can't be held accountable by what they say".

    But, if social media becomes content curators, like Tim Cook said when Apple banned Alex Jones, then what are they exactly? Like, a lot of this discussion makes sense when you see that as long as Section 230 is there, a lot of companies don't have to do anything if they don't want to.

  • PhasenPhasen Let's Disrupt the 2020 ElectionRegistered User regular
    Facebook, Google, Twitter, Youtube (Yes I know Google) and Instagram all need to be regulated as utilities.

    Facebook won't be on top as more boomers die off and other platforms are more elevated. They already lie about all their numbers to sell to advertisers. It will be a conservative bastion till then. A utility it is not.

    I find it interesting the jump to social media as a utility. Wouldn't the telecoms be a far better fit? Unless you are suggesting nationalize everything and that doesn't seem to be your particular leaning.

    psn: PhasenWeeple
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    And because reality is written by hacks, Russian Trolls Sue Facebook, Their Old Propaganda Machine
    And a year after Facebook belatedly attempted to slam the grate shut on the Russian troll farm known as the Internet Research Agency, the St. Petersburg-based trolls are taking the social-media giant to court.

    A corporate twin of the infamous IRA, calling itself the Federal Agency of News (FAN), filed suit in a northern California federal court on Tuesday demanding that judges force Facebook to restore its account. The Russian outlet insisted it’s merely “an independent, authentic and legitimate news agency.” And it made an argument likely to discomfort Facebook and attract support from the far right: it’s a free speech martyr unfairly victimized by the 21st century discourse’s digital gatekeepers.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    YoutubeZilla360
  • DedwrekkaDedwrekka What Would Nyarlathotep Do? Registered User regular
    Kipling217 wrote: »
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    If Facebook was a public utility, then the same laws and protections that apply to speach in the public square should apply to it. Which would probably be less restrictive on Nazis than Facebook's current policies.

    Dude no, if somebody did half the harassment that Nazi do on facebook in a public square, they would be fined, arrested and removed by the cops before you could say "nazi war crimes for 500 alex"!

    The level of vitriol and hate on Facebook is way higher then what we would allow in any public setting, routinely reaching death threats and systemic stalking. The only reason more people are not jailed for it is because Facebook is uncooperative, making it hard to document it and track down the real world location of the Nazis.

    Should be noted that, thanks to Bellingcat, we know that most of their organization activities take place off of public social media and on services like Discord. Bellingcat has been tracking down the identities of these people anyways.

  • grumblethorngrumblethorn Registered User regular
    milski wrote: »
    Facebook, Google, Twitter, Youtube (Yes I know Google) and Instagram all need to be regulated as utilities.

    Nah, this is the line Nazis use to say they shouldn't be able to remove Nazi content.

    Godwin in 1. Bravo.

    So, what you're saying is that you don't actually have an argument, just a rote truism that the person it's named for has conceded doesn't work anymore in our current society.

    Because the reason you see the argument that online services should be run in a "neutral" manner is because there's a contingent that has started to face opprobrium for their conduct where they haven't before, and instead of examining why that is the case, they want to go back to where their behavior wasn't held against them.

    My argument was previously stated. I don't like the private companies I listed being unregulated, it's a new age and the government needs to step up and regulate this mess.

    You get a Godwin response when people make stupid comments like the one above. Because in essence what your saying is, "this private corporation currently enforces restrictions i find pleasant to my moral compass, this will never change."

    uh huh.

  • DoodmannDoodmann Registered User regular
    It needs to be something where it's not necessarily like "we're limiting who and what can be said on your platform"

    It needs to be a "your platform cannot be built to reward bad behavior and bad actors"

    Whippy wrote: »
    nope nope nope nope abort abort talk about anime
    Torchlight | Steam | ART
    destroyah87CouscousmilskigrumblethornZilla360Man in the Mists
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    https://techcrunch.com/2018/11/20/schrage-definers/
    TechCrunch has obtained an internal memo published by Facebook’s outgoing head of public policy Elliot Schrage in which he blames himself for hiring PR firm Definers. He admits to having the company push negative narratives about competitors, but says Facebook did not ask or pay Definers to publish fake news. COO Sheryl Sandberg left a comment on the memo, saying it was never Facebook’s intention to play into anti-Semitic theories about George Soros.
    Schrage announced in June that he’d be stepping down in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica scandal, but would stay on to help find a replacement. Many have asked who, if anyone, would be fired for putting Facebook in cahoots with Definers. As TechCrunch previously reported, Schrage was atop the chain of command here. Given his extensive experience in public policy, he likely was well aware of the nature of Definers’ work. Schrage taking the blame provides a convenient solution to the issue, as he’s already on his way out.
    Why did we hire Definers?

    We hired Definers in 2017 as part of our efforts to diversify our DC advisors after the election. Like many companies, we needed to broaden our outreach. We also faced growing pressure from competitors in tech, telcos and media companies that want government to regulate us.

    This pressure became particularly acute in September 2017 after we released details of Russian interference on our service. We hired firms associated with both Republicans and Democrats — Definers was one of the Republican-affiliated firms.
    Did we ask them to do work on George Soros?

    Yes. In January 2018, investor and philanthropist George Soros attacked Facebook in a speech at Davos, calling us a “menace to society.” We had not heard such criticism from him before and wanted to determine if he had any financial motivation. Definers researched this using public information.

    Later, when the “Freedom from Facebook” campaign emerged as a so-called grassroots coalition, the team asked Definers to help understand the groups behind them. They learned that George Soros was funding several of the coalition members. They prepared documents and distributed these to the press to show that this was not simply a spontaneous grassroots movement.

    So Elliot Schrage is the fall guy.

    How did they think a Republican-affiliated firm would attack Soros? It is pretty much all anti-Semitism.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Man if you believe facebook's story at all here then you haven't been paying attention at this point. Like this is a kid hand covered in cookie crumbs offering fake news explanations.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    AngelHedgieThawmusFencingsaxMoridin889YoutubeZilla360shrykeMan in the MistsMartini_Philosopher
  • AegisAegis Not Quite TorontoRegistered User regular
    There seems to be a giant structural error involved there where the approach to handling PR was to specifically hire separate firms for each of the main parties and thus, balance!

    We'll see how long this blog lasts
    Currently DMing: None :(
    Characters
    [5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
    CelestialBadger
  • BogartBogart I Will Cure You Registered User, Moderator mod
    Stop implying people are Nazis and stop saying other people are saying stupid things, even if you think they are saying stupid things.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Aegis wrote: »
    There seems to be a giant structural error involved there where the approach to handling PR was to specifically hire separate firms for each of the main parties and thus, balance!

    Yeah it seems like they literally both sidesed their PR here. Which is insane. "This is the pr for dem, this is the pr for republicans" yeah that's not how you should do PR ever.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    Http:// pleasepaypreacher.net
    FencingsaxCelestialBadgerYoutubeHefflingMan in the Mists
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    The other bit of news that Facebook is trying to submerge is that they did, in fact, order the Code Red - they ordered Definers to go after Soros.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    shrykeCelestialBadgerYoutubeLabelMan in the Mists
  • DedwrekkaDedwrekka What Would Nyarlathotep Do? Registered User regular
    Doodmann wrote: »
    It needs to be something where it's not necessarily like "we're limiting who and what can be said on your platform"

    It needs to be a "your platform cannot be built to reward bad behavior and bad actors"

    For regulation to work under US law, yes.

    I'm also okay with the company just saying, "We don't want this on our site".

    I personally disagree with the somewhat puritanical way that social media companies go after what they see as pornography on their sites, but the existence of these kinds of purges establish that the companies are 100% willing and able to purge unwanted content from their sites.

    durandal4532Doodmann
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    I feel like a lot of the worst of what social media produces would be significantly blunted by removing the profit motive.

    So much of what sucks about social media is the relentless drive to get you to engage in behaviors that boost the possible ad revenue projections at the cost of your own mental health and the relationships it's ostensibly fostering.

    And while it's clear that the people designing these applications understand they can be made better, they can't afford to actually take any of those steps.

    Like twitter's recent Big Update to Improve Conversations:

    Twitter has made follower counts appear less prominent on its iOS app by making the font size smaller in a new redesign effort, according to a Twitter spokesperson. The change comes after CEO Jack Dorsey repeatedly said that he wants to rethink how the company could prioritize “meaningful” conversations over numbers like retweets, likes, and follows.


    beforeafter.jpg

    Take a moment to donate what you can to the International Rescue Committee, the National Immigration Law Center, the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the American Civil Liberties Union. There has never been a more urgent moment to do so.
    DoodmannYoutube
  • OghulkOghulk biggest externality low-energy economistRegistered User regular
    In terms of regulation, I'm not sure if anyone here reads The Economist but this week's main piece is about breaking up tech monopolies

    They make a lot of good arguments for why the likes of Facebook and Google should be broken up

    raoADVy.png
    Doodmanndestroyah87Fencingsaxshrykedurandal4532Zilla360Man in the Mists
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Oghulk wrote: »
    In terms of regulation, I'm not sure if anyone here reads The Economist but this week's main piece is about breaking up tech monopolies

    They make a lot of good arguments for why the likes of Facebook and Google should be broken up

    One of the bigger problems with tech that doesn't get talked about much is how the entire industry is built around acquisition these days. People don't found tech firms for the long haul anymore - there's always a goal to be bought out by someone else. Furthermore, part of how Alphabet, Facebook, and the other big tech companies keep their position is by just buying out whoever could be a threat.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    Doodmanndurandal4532destroyah87FencingsaxshrykeMillDarkPrimusAistanZilla360YoutubeMoridin889KamarHefflingnever dieMan in the Mists
  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    How do you break them up though? The datamining and ads are what pay for everything else?

    steam_sig.png
    RMS OceanicDoodmann
  • Phoenix-DPhoenix-D Registered User regular
    Oghulk wrote: »
    In terms of regulation, I'm not sure if anyone here reads The Economist but this week's main piece is about breaking up tech monopolies

    They make a lot of good arguments for why the likes of Facebook and Google should be broken up

    I'm a little dubious about that because a lot of companies should be broken up. And this push very noticably started after the Bezos owned Post started giving Trump shit.

    dispatch.o
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    A lot of tech companies seek the sort of vertical and horizontal integration that is looked upon with a lot of suspicion in companies that aren't considered tech companies and don't have the feeling of "it has always been this way" that some of the older companies do.

    destroyah87
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Spoit wrote: »
    How do you break them up though? The datamining and ads are what pay for everything else?

    Break them apart by the companies they were before being bought out. And if you do that, it might force them to work on new funding models.
    Phoenix-D wrote: »
    I'm a little dubious about that because a lot of companies should be broken up. And this push very noticably started after the Bezos owned Post started giving Trump shit.

    People have been talking about breaking up the tech companies for some time now. And yes, a lot of companies should be broken up - like many issues we have, you can blame Reagan for this, as it was during his Administration that the current "benefit the consumer" model used to determine if corporations should be broken up was instituted.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
    Fencingsaxkime
  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Aegis wrote: »
    There seems to be a giant structural error involved there where the approach to handling PR was to specifically hire separate firms for each of the main parties and thus, balance!

    Yeah it seems like they literally both sidesed their PR here. Which is insane. "This is the pr for dem, this is the pr for republicans" yeah that's not how you should do PR ever.

    It is in the super segregated media world Facebook is trying to produce. Good news is that we aren't there yet.

  • PhyphorPhyphor Building Planet Busters Tasting FruitRegistered User regular
    Spoit wrote: »
    How do you break them up though? The datamining and ads are what pay for everything else?

    Break them apart by the companies they were before being bought out. And if you do that, it might force them to work on new funding models.

    Why don't you give a concrete example, because there are dozens to hundreds of acquisitions over the years. Or are you just thinking of the "big" acquisitions people can name

    How do you fund otherwise given away for free software? Like chrome, that's probably a hundred million a year cost at least. Free quality browsers are a good thing, but they cost $$$ to make
    What about tech that got acquired and integrated into already-existing things?

    Oh, and all the service code is in one giant repository and none of it will work on another platform or datacenter because everything is custom-built to operate at massive scale. Go

    Magic Box
    Academician Prokhor "Phyphor" Zakharov, Chief Scientist of China, Provost of the University of Planet - SE++ Megagame
    MrMisterSpoitMoridin889
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    How do you fund otherwise given away for free software? Like chrome, that's probably a hundred million a year cost at least. Free quality browsers are a good thing, but they cost $$$ to make
    So not Chrome.

  • PhyphorPhyphor Building Planet Busters Tasting FruitRegistered User regular
    Nah it's fine, it just wants to eat all the ram you have

    Magic Box
    Academician Prokhor "Phyphor" Zakharov, Chief Scientist of China, Provost of the University of Planet - SE++ Megagame
    ForarMoridin889Jebus314BullheadDoodmannThawmus
Sign In or Register to comment.