Should Google and Facebook be regulated as Utilities?

>>137454468
bump

>>137454468
No, because alternatives exist.

since they have the monopoly.... maybe?

>>137454468
No

>Bannon: "We should to everything that fills my bank account."

Enjoy your kleptocracy.

File: 33742_1096430400.jpg (20KB, 200x514px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 200x514px

>>137454468
Yes, they should. All this "BUT THEY'RE A PRIVATE COMPANY LULZ" nonsense needs to stop. Company's like Google and Facebook have an incredible amount of power and benefit greatly from being able to operate in society. So having a little bit of oversight put on them to make sure they don't abuse their power seems like a fair trade.

>>137454468

As much as I hate them and want them to die. No. We're Americans, private enterprise is supposed to be that. Plus this is a dangerous slope to go down.

Yeah it's toxic commie shit. But it is what it is.

>>137454468
No, i like my government's power low as minimum on businesses. Just use else like Duckduckgo

>>137454850
they are monopolies, saying there are alternatives is stupid

File: 26dbe2a53f908aec8651e8cf98fe60c32f4757666dc554029dcd8227c6526263.gif (3MB, 487x355px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 487x355px

>>137454468
Fuck no, bust them into pieces with an anti-trust suit.

Eurofaggots can keep their marxist bullshit on their pozzed continent.

>>137454468
YES! This should be a thing. They have such a tremendous amount of power that unless the government can guarantee our freedom to speak, they can censor according to their whims. They must be put under the boot of the government or they will supplant the government's ability to ensure freedom.

>>137454468
If the government took control, wouldn't they be prohibited from shutting down sites?

The internet has a tendency to cycle through top websites without regulation. If users are disatisfied with a particular site they leave, find an alternative, alternative site gets big, and cycle repeats. It has happened a number of times.

>>137455099
>Google Search
DuckDuckGo

>Google Maps
OpenStreetMaps

>Facebook
Diaspora
Bitmessage
Email with PGP
IRC
Ricochet

>>137455051
Is it possible that Libertarians are even bigger cucks than liberals? At least they believe that they can do things using the government; lolberts want the govt's hands tied behind its back.

>>137454468
They are monopolies engaged in Leftists social engineering.

>>137454468
Only if they want to regulate ISPs in the same manner.

>>137455051
Yes good goy, America is a free country and private enterprises should be allowed to have the power to brainwash the entire population.

>>137455468
This man is correct. Websites rise and fall there's no need to have the government seize sites because they're popular.

>>137454468
>>137454570
>>137454872
>>137455009
Just admit you faggot want a safe space

File: image.jpg (21KB, 200x281px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 200x281px

THE WEST MUST BE SAVED!

RESTORE YOUR PRIDE, RESTORE YOUR CULTURE!!

STATES RIGHTS!! https://youtu.be/hCIc5ymZai4 [Open]

CUT EPA!!


CUT DEP OF ED!!


MAGA

of course!
comrade bannon knows the way :^)

>>137455360
Exactly!

>>137454468
That's one of the main reasons (((they))) want him gone. We have to get Steve Bannon to communicate to us and Trump that these (((people))) have to go!

Why not just host it on Tor?

>>137454468
You fucking peon.

Giving the government power to regulate will turn the internet into a PC safe space even faster.

>>137455548
>>137455664

>IN ORDER TO FIGHT JEWISH COMMUNISM, WE HAVE TO RESORT TO JEWISH COMMUNISM

How fucking dumb are you?

File: 1473367794298.gif (996KB, 500x280px) Image search: [Google]

996KB, 500x280px

>>137454850
>No, because alternatives exist.
>>137455343
>Fuck no, bust them into pieces with an anti-trust suit.

12D chess. he want anons to think they know a better alternative. to think it is there own idea

t. big fan of his

I hate unflexible libertarians. If Google and Facebook was in charge like how ancaps want, it would be tyranny. I might have a bias since I'm American but I truly think that our government stepping in to regulate these fuck huge companies is a good thing. The government and businesses don't care about the average person but at least it feels like the US government cares more about the average person more than google and facebook do.

>>137454468
yes

File: ed3338dc4500cc4bfda9b4eb7a743d76.jpg (92KB, 716x700px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 716x700px

>>137456504
>it feels like the US government cares more about the average person more than google and facebook do.
we dont have much influence but at least we have a vote. i support universal health care for the same reason

>>137455468
But none of those websites in the past have lead to business empires like Google and Facebook. Times have changed and we need to look towards the future when it comes to freedom with technology rather than to the past.

holy shit, so you idiots are so full of cognitive dissonance that you're calling for state regulations to preserve your safe spaces because you can't handle that private business owners can exercise control of their companies any way they please?

f u c k i n g k e k

>>137456815
Lets not bring up healthcare in this thread

>>137456993
Typical mental gymnastics I would expect from a communist.

Anti-trust acts should be enforced.
They absolutely are monopolies

File: 1469719948835.gif (3MB, 350x280px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 350x280px

>>137457002
pffff. whatevez.

>>137456165
>if you regulate corporations in order to fight all forms of censorship, you are a commie

>>137456815
Would you still support it the next time a dem wins?

>>137454468
b-b-but the NAP exists!

We've already been exposed to your ideas NAZI FAGGOTS. We just don't agree with you because we aren't psychopaths

>>137454468
YES KANG SLAY

>>137455009
This. The left already use them as their own empires. Might as well add a legal fiction of oversight as a Damocles' sword.

No. I like Styx's suggestion. Extend the 1st and 4th amendment to cover the internet

File: tulsi gabbard.jpg (94KB, 620x413px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 620x413px

>>137457450
id follow her anywhere

>>137454850
What do you think about the christian bakers? Should they be forced to provide service if other bakers are in the area?

File: laughing roasties.png (490KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 449x401px

>>137455525
>>Facebook
>Diaspora
>Bitmessage
>Email with PGP
>IRC
>Ricochet

>>137455683
A safe space is a space where no dissident opinion can be voiced. Aka exactly what Google is trying to achieve.

>>137454468
He is absolutely right, just like about most things.

>>137455525
Water and electricity are utilities, despite alternatives existing which do allow someone to live off grid.

File: zuckrice.jpg (84KB, 1190x595px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 1190x595px

>silicon valley lobbies to get bannon out of the wh

Our future is to be zuck'd into forced soylent feedings and degenerate VR

>>137455683
Nope, we want consistency. If Christian Bakers can be sued out of business, why should telecom companies get a free pass? Consistency is important in a Democratic society. These double standards are breeding resentment and it is going to destabilize our society.

>>137456165
>muh horseshoe theory

Only a coward doesn't stand by his ideals

File: 1502295681841.jpg (214KB, 1280x1280px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 1280x1280px

>>137454468
lol you idiots think you will be censored less if the goverment controls it?

File: br.jpg (28KB, 650x366px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 650x366px

>>137457841
where's your list cunt?

>>137458300
vkontakte :^)

File: 4b6d93e8d5581834ae050633e769d451--auguste-rodin-entry-level.jpg (15KB, 225x300px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 225x300px

I don't see a problem with these corporations being regulated at all. I guess you can say there is an alternative to facebook (even though the alternatives are just as commie acting), but with google there is practically no competition for it at all. When people say these are private organizations, then whey are these "private" organizations getting huge amounts of government money and practically working hand in hand with the government. Once they started accepting large amounts of government funding and working closely with them (practically hand in hand) aren't they defacto government corporations.

It's telling that social conservatism has gone so far it's no longer even compatible with economic conservatism. This is why Bannon calls himself a Leninist. The nu-right is pro-authoritarianism and anti-freedom.

idk wtf Facebook is doing
But we don't touch Google
they perform and fund actual science

If we get robot waifus it will be because Google helped in development

>>137454468
Lets say they were publicly owned. Whats to stop an elected official doing what the people he represents wants to be done by shutting down websites with hurtful language?

File: 74b.jpg (29KB, 252x291px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 252x291px

>>137454468
i especially hate that if you google:

american inventors
white couple
white woman
white mother

you get nothing but white women with black babies, black inventors, white men that look like tit cows. It's crazy really. you can't turn on the television without seeing a black man/ white woman combo in a commercial, as if that is what the majority of the country is actually doing. Nothing in our media reflects real life. It is all propaganda for what ((((they)))) have planned for OUR futures. better get your anal bum covers ready

>>137458972
What's to prevent them from doing that now?

>>137458972
USconstitution.jpg

>>137454468
No, Interventionism doesn't work.

>>137458875
Okay Google.

File: majpeg.jpg (22KB, 736x538px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 736x538px

>>137459304
you'd still be using this without it

>>137458972
Oh you mean like how they constantly shutdown conservative and rightwing voices right now?

>>137454468
Sure give goverment even more control over every aspect of live. Because goverment worked hard and build those companies. And we all know that government owned companies are known for efficieny, innovation and fair competition.

File: 1400957322576.gif (927KB, 250x230px) Image search: [Google]

927KB, 250x230px

>>137454468
>conservitards and alt-righters are incapable of creating anything intelligent
>want to exploit and possibly suppress the work of others who are more successful
>because "stop liking what I don't like"

Trying to regulate tech giants because they specifically disagree with you is, in a way, the same as black actors demanding to be cast in white roles. Both want something for nothing, and both seek to profit from the success of others that they dispise.

And who said horseshoe theory wasn't real?

>>137454468
No, there are better ways to deal with disruptive nests of jewish thieves like Faceberg and Joogle.
Just tax online advertising, attack their revenue streams any way you can. Why should the burden of funding the federal government fall on hard working middle class whites when you can pop these jewish billionaires with excise taxes?

Don't be afraid of the word tax. Taxes are a potent weapon for crippling your opponent, and you should always have some stocked in your arsenal to deal with worms like Sergie, Brin, and Zuckercuck. Why do you think Jews fund these rabid libertarian groups that oppose taxes in any form whatsoever? Because they know how devastatingly effective taxes are for combatting Jewish corruption and nepotism. The bonus is that when you hit corrupt kikes with excise taxes, you can use that revenue increase to offset the income tax, and provide relief to the middle class. Truly a win-win.

>>137459752
No, rich Wallstreet traders are the ones who popularized smaller phones.

>>137460375
>specifically disagree with you
no, they censor us

>>137460767
it was illegal for any other company to make phones. im talking the 70's anon

>>137458741
I think if was I'd be pissed. Imagine your name and the news site you used to run being censored through algos, algos that are not publicly available or known to the consumer?

He's siding with the left so its funny. He's going to trap them in their own game. He is going to rip the facade off of them.

I totally support his policy to see if lefties suddenly become ancap level discrimination rights

File: hoppe-awoo.png (381KB, 1000x900px) Image search: [Google]

381KB, 1000x900px

>>137454468
No you retards they shouldn't be regulated. As soon as the government develops a legal framework for regulation, google and facebook will buy out the politicians and government bureaucrats and use the legal framework to further crush competition. The government can only enable monopoly, not prevent it.

>>137455525
duckduckgo is jewish and not private

startpage is the best.

>>137454468
Normally I'd say no, but for those two bastions of communist thought, absolutely. Give 'em what they want for everyone else.

>>137461904
>Hoppe, libtard and product of (((Von Mises))) and (((Rothbard)))
Pure ideology.
Fuck off, kike.

>>137462070
It doesn't matter that duckduckgo is jewish. For now, the problem is google's monopoly, not who owns the alternatives. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

>>137454850
Google has it's hands in so many places on the internet. There is no competition to them, not even remotely close.

>>137459157

This is one of the biggest problems.

They are basically brainwashing kids who need to Google information for school assignments.

>>137454468
He's right you know

>>137459157
THIS IS WHY FREE MARKETS IS SHIT FFS

I swear, Americans will never understand

File: 1383521606928.gif (2MB, 175x190px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 175x190px

>>137460885
Then stop thinking like a fucking gimmedat welfare monkey and make your own Google or Facebook. Free speech, anything goes, etc and so forth. Hell, you could make it the anti-Google or anti-Facebook and censor leftists. Who cares, it's your company.

But you can't, and you know you can't. Because you have to be incredibly smart to make something even orders of magnitude less than Google or Facebook, technically and economically.

So, failing that, you want to force them to GIVE you what you want, instead of doing it yourself. You want a company more successful than any other at this discipline to ALLOW you to type what you want to type, because the alternative is literally nothing. Like a parent ALLOWS a child to have a small favor.

You are powerless to make yourself heard without these tech giants you so despise, so instead you try to "regulate" them, i.e. threaten them into doing what you yourself are incapable of.

It's quite undignified, to think about it like that. And it must hurt all of you free market, free speech, pro-capitalist types to have to advocate twisting the arms of the incredibly successful to get what you want, when they won't acquiesce to your demands. Just like the untalented and butthurt actors and SJWs who have to twist the arms of the rich and powerful to be GIVEN what they couldn't earn themselves.

Sad!

Every day Bannon becomes more and more /ourguy/.

Libertarians are their hard ons for free markets and open societies despite the devastating cultural repercussions need to fuck off.

>>137463438
>make your own Google or Facebook

these institutions are heavily government funded and entwined, moron. just fucking kill yourself for this disgusting braindead post

>>137463438
A bunch of jewish gangsters form a racket, and if anyone tries to hold them accountable, your solution is that we should all ignore their corruption and just put our noses to the grindstone. If there is a monkey in this thread, it is you.

>>137463677
He's always been our guy. He's an American who reads Charles Maurras. He's not here for the money, he's not here for the power. I bet he wants America to be fascist.

>>137454468
Yes.

>>137458014
Yeah but we can only have so many power lines and pipes. Those utilities are regulated by area. These are just websites.

>>137454468
No, they should not be allowed to break privacy laws. If you enforce privacy laws, that would kill their revenue instantly.
They are both advertising companies at heart, they lie and get clicks. That's their job.

>>137454468
Bump. Excellent.

>>137454468
Yes. They've gotten too powerful.

>>137458972
That has already been happening.Higher ups at google were at the white house once a week while Obama was in charge.

https://theintercept.com/2016/04/22/googles-remarkably-close-relationship-with-the-obama-white-house-in-two-charts/

>>137458972
Read the OP. It says regulated like utilities, not publicly owned.

File: 1387087162114.gif (775KB, 245x245px) Image search: [Google]

775KB, 245x245px

>>137464012
Yeah, it's not like Google is a monumentally-complex company with millions of machines and hundreds of billions of lines of code. It's not like some of the most brilliant minds in computing devoted much of their lives to solving incredibly complex problems.

No, it's the Jews. And corrupt Jews, to boot!

totally, because the u.s. government will make sure your freedoms and liberties are protected!

>>137463729
You really, really missed the point of the post

>>137465723
your posts have no point, they are just google shill garbage

time's almost up

>>137465325
How many gorillion lines of code are there on google machines?
I know a racket when I see it. And I agree, it's a big one. But that doesn't make it any less corrupt, or any less needing of breaking up.
In an environment in which anyone can be railroaded at anytime by a jew muttering one word, anti-semite, under his breath, everything is suspect. The burden is on these kikes to prove they are above board, and frankly, I don't see any evidence that they have.

File: 1372573305027.jpg (14KB, 180x246px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 180x246px

>>137465845
Literally not a coherent argument.

I think I know why you got so upset when I suggested that you make your own Google or Facebook, as such an undertaking would be far too difficult for you

File: 1479439582709.png (186KB, 963x787px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 963x787px

>>137466526
you failed now you pay the price

>>137454468
Yes but there's no way this administration or any other could possibly regulate them correctly.

How can you regulate something that you have no grasp of understanding?

>>137466910
Just break Google up, you don't need to apply any additional regulation to the day to day operations of their subsidiaries.
Faceberg is a bit more complicated. They just need to be driven out of business. You just put together a package of excise taxes that attack their revenue streams, or otherwise cripple their business, just force them to go under, or hamper their activity so much that other Facebook-like social media companies get a foothold and the market has a dozen different companies doing what beep boop Zuckerkike is doing now.

>>137466893
>>137465991
You are both literally retarded.
Please, I implore you, kill yourself.
>BAN BAN BAN
>REGULATE REGULATE REGULATE
Literally SJW tier.

>>137465991
>The burden is on these kikes to prove they are above board
Isn't there a presumption of innocence until proven guilty here? And also isn't ever man allowed to say whatever he pleases within the confines of his own company? Isn't it their company, their rules?

You can be a pro-free speech capitalist or not, it's entirely up to you. But just remember that if you go down this road the next liberal President can go fucking ham on whatever viewpoint you deem worthy, using his newly-appointed regulatory powers.

Seems to me (and please feel free to disagree) that if Obama or Hillary was advocating regulating Brietbart, you would be gleefully mocking SJWs demanding gimmedats from a successful website. But because it's someone you disagree with, you support going against cherished American ideals like free enterprise and free speech? Actually curious as to how you can justify this other than

>Google is too big to be treated normally
>reaches too many people with views I don't agree with

>>137467392
Not an argument. Thanks for the (You), kind anon.

Yeah, well I want Steve Bannon regulated.

File: 1396828134813.gif (1MB, 213x210px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 213x210px

>>137466893
What does that have to do with anything?

>>137467366

with decent privacy laws this would happen naturally. collecting and selling private information is a perverse business model.

>>137467366
How would you stop them from colluding behind the scenes with eachother and maintaining the power structure?

>>137467486
The level of pilpul in this post is astounding

Are you a higher up at Google? Panicking?

>>137456138
You´re wrong, because that will make the 1st amendment apply to Facebook and prevents the sitatuton you are afraid of. Not that you´d know about free speech because you´re a leaf.

File: 1396556676711.png (65KB, 150x190px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 150x190px

>>137467392
>mfw 10,000 posts in someone finally agrees with me on /pol/

Th-thanks

>>137467486
>Isn't there a presumption of innocence until proven guilty here?
No, they are not on trial here for breaking the law. The ethnic nepotism that led to their monopoly is not technically illegal. I'm stirring up a rabble to destroy them, not putting together a legal brief that I will shop among my coethnics until I get the result I want.

>>137467552
>I am so dumb I cannot see that the reflex to ban or regulate the free market is the same thing that I complain about my opponents doing.
Again, please, kill yourself.

>>137454872
they broke up microsoft over less.

>>137467979
The few of us who have been here for more than 2 years rarely post, but we still remain, watching the ripples.

>>137467850
I wouldn't. They always do that, and it is probably impossible to stop them, and perhaps even undesirable in some ways. What I'm talking about is not putting out fires, it's pissing on the highest flames.

File: 1397463960427.jpg (11KB, 215x280px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 215x280px

>>137467861
>not an argument at all

PS
Yes, I am a higher up at Google and I am so terrified that I'm actually arguing with a retarded person on the asshole of the internet instead of doing anything meaningful with my time.

>>137467979
>agrees with a pro-(((libertarian))) comment
>posts pic related, a jew
what are the odds?

>>137454468
This is the dumbest idea I have heard in quite a while.

This will inevitably lead to the government regulating speech.

Google and facebook are soon to fall prey to distributed hash tables and peer to peer file hosting via WebRTC.

Let them die a natural death. Don't regulate them and give them the ability to perform regulartory capture and prevent any of the competition that would ensure free speech online in the future.

>>137468004
>when the market is so free it allows corporations to effectively remove cornerstone western values such as liberty and entirely shift and destroy culture

epic. bet you want as many refugees as we can take huh shlomo

>>137467850

see

>>137467796

>>137454468
>liberals demand that ISPs be regulated as utilities, arguing that despite the existence of alternatives, they constitute a monopoly
>liberals demand that social media and email providers not be regulated as utilities, arguing that despite the lack of alternatives, they do not constitute a monopoly

>>137454468
yes, fuck off ancaps

>>137468004
>something like an argument
Better. I don't believe in free lunches, much less free markets. What I want is a properly regulated market.

What's fair is fair. If google and Facebook want the internet to be regulated as a utility then Facebook and google should be regulated as one as well

>>137468381
why would i bother arguing with garbage? you've already lost, we're just waiting for Trump to give the O.K for guillotines

>>137454468
Yes. Make them utilities and end their reign of terror.

>>137454468
regulate cable companies as utilities first

>>137469085
No reason not to do both at the same time

>>137468521
>>137468778
Two for One (You)'s.
Successsssssss.

>What I want is a properly regulated market.
Then join the Libs fag.

>>137469834
>didnt even try arguing

i have a habit of making your type kvetch

>>137469834
Stop running basketball americans and uppity women for president, and I'll consider it.

File: Desgooglefication2.jpg (239KB, 587x1261px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 587x1261px

FUCK GOOGLE

>>137470056
>>137470288
>YOUR A JEW
>YOU LIKE BLACKS AND WOMEN
Oy Vey.

>>137468501
>This will inevitably lead to the government regulating speech.
which is ironic, considering the only reason people are considering this is because the companies regulating speech

This whole conversation is: Who should have the power to censor what.

The interesting point is that certain companies are like something of a monopoly. Pretty much everyone uses facebook (or most people who use such a social media site do), same for google. This is not those companies faults and its not those peoples faults. This is the same issue with Tv news. A small choice of possible outlets, the majority of the masses takes the path of least resistance and the route that connects them all and that everyone else is doing.

It is just that this gives these companies great power over the information presented to the masses.

File: 1482347105041.png (573KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

573KB, 900x900px

>>137468381
Motherfucking coward piece of shit.

>>137454468
how would government suppressing speech be any better than a private entity doing it? because that's what will happen. either way - there will be censorship.

>>137470617
>This is not those companies faults

lol, of course it is.

File: 04 LeninSmile.jpg (12KB, 250x266px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 250x266px

>>137456165
>regulating monopolies is communism
That's propertarianism for you: dumb and uneducated.

>>137470491
/g/ here
you're a retard

>>137470590
I like people and things in their proper places. Women belong at home, and blacks who want to rule belong in africa.

>>137460375
>And who said horseshoe theory wasn't real?
Just because group A may utilize a conceptual element of group B in common, does not mean group A is or is near equal to group B

>>137456165
>false dilemma fallacy.
Not an argument.

>>137455063
>jewjewgo
Use yandex or startpage

ignore this shill thread

>>137471424
ignore this shill post

>>137470858
I meant its not those companies faults that 'the natural course is for the masses to connect to one another and thus 'naturally select' the system to do that over', these companies 'happened' to win over.

Was it theoretically possible for right wing nationalist ceos, inventors, board of directors, companies, to create the winning platforms the masses chose?

Company A happened to be the company that the masses ended up most using to connect with one another (be it google, facebook, or mainstream media), thus the masses are beholden to the owners of these companies choices.

>>137454468

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nqdQU7bOZM

No, there are other ways.

>>137455525
>OpenStreetMaps
Thanks man, i wa looking for something like this.

>>137462404
I see Bing as an alternative even if it's part of the ZOG at least it isn't jewish (anyone with sauce on gates being crypto?). Paul Allen is WASP and if you look at the companes the (((govt))) has hit with antitrust, they're always white.

Bing is the closest competitor, it's the ony search engine that can take market from Google in the short term.

>>137454468
/ourguy/

Bannon is unironically Nazbol and it's great.

Fuck Google.

File: lolbertarians 2.jpg (58KB, 348x441px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 348x441px

>>137454468
Yes this is a matter of free speech and giving a platform to anyone. It should also be illegal to be fired for your political beliefs. Also fuck lolbertarianism

>>137455009
Literally communism.

File: stalin porky.png (65KB, 500x514px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 500x514px

>>137472443
>Nazbol

Lol no he is a right wing populist not a communist loving kike

>>137472158
Right, the key is not necessarily to take out your biggest enemy, but rather to play them all off against one another. The problem is not really individual companies or groups themselves, though it can be, but the overwhelming concentration of power in one band.

>>137458300

>yAndex
>quant
>minds
>palemoon

>>137471090

give us your list shill cha de tumadre

>>137471779

so then isn't the obvious solution to break them up? again, it wouldn't even be an issue in the first place if we had decent privacy law.

>>137470636
Jebaited

>>137472736
That's the problem for sure why no antitrust yet? Antitrust is never pursued against jew-owned companies.

It'd be interesting to see who (((Theodore Rosenvelt))) shut down since he was such a famous cryptojew trustbuster I bet most or more likely all of the companies were white.

>>137473596
>privacy law.

if anything needs more regulation, it's this. not speech.

>>137472736
The problem is 'agenda'. Noone can be fully trusted to have The Truths best interest. Whether its private companies or the government. There are times when they do and do not want the public to know this or that.

>>137454468
Once you sign up to Facebook and add content it's extremely difficult to remove your data. Once data is shared it now belongs to Facebook.
Thank goodness I never got Zuckered.

>>137473596
well first lets think of why OP is stated in the first place. What is it feared facebook and google can do with their power? Censor, manipulate results.

The stated is that it is possible there are damning truths possible, that these companies do not want the masses to know. Even though freedom of speech exists, it is potentially desirable for a company like facebook to not allow white supremacist to spam millions of black peoples pages with the n word all day every day. (so one solution to that, is a setting that does not allow strangers to post on your page, etc.).

So what is it really feared that google and facebook can do? another thing for facebook, is manipulate what is trending, hide what is trending. What is thought of that? Google can manipulate search results.

hm?

>>137474913
>So what is it really feared that google and facebook can do? another thing for facebook, is manipulate what is trending, hide what is trending. What is thought of that? Google can manipulate search results.

the solution is to have many independent alternatives and ask ourselves how they got so big in the first place. not to centralize further and integrate them into the government.

>>137476374
but the fear is that large powerful information companies such as these and the news, hold vast sway over the gullible and naive masses views, opinions, and awareness of reality and the world.

Having many independent organizations wont change the fact that the majority of the masses have congregated at a comfy waterhole and have no reason to move. And the owners of that water hole choose what kool aid to place in it when

>>137478512
How expensive would internet regulation be? What are the regulations most desired?
You cannot deny free speech (unless its blatant harassing)?
You cannot manipulate trendings?
You cannot pedal false news?

That would cost maybe a few thousand dollars a year, because it would all be user reported.

>>137479619
The FCC has more employees than you are even suggesting as a budget in dollars.

>>137454468
I am not, my business my rules, dont like it gtfo.

>>137472460
kek guy who gets fired in instant when his power level is reveal´d.

>>137480028
so there already is internet regulation? or what is FCC in charge of regulating?
What do they ensure?

>>137478069
>Having many independent organizations wont change the fact that the majority of the masses have congregated at a comfy waterhole and have no reason to move. And the owners of that water hole choose what kool aid to place in it when

this is where privacy laws come in. if they can't make money by selling the data of their billion users, they won't be able to host so many of them.

and yes, i realize that's a fantasy.

>>137480672
I can't believe an American is asking me whan the FCC does

>>137467486
^prettymuch

>>137454468

Great.

>>137480765

in short, people will form their own groups around their own interests. we don't need giants like facebook.

>>137480835
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Communications_Commission#Mission_and_strategy

ok, so how expensive would it be to tack on:
What are the regulations most desired?
You cannot deny free speech (unless its blatant harassing)?
You cannot manipulate trendings?
You cannot pedal false news?

>>137480868
the main difference appears to be a default state vs a manipulated state. Free speech is the default state, natural actual trending data is the default state.

>>137463438
I hope you got mugged by a nigger on pcp

>>137455051
Wanna be with you on this but I have to disagree. Google and Facecrap are monopolies. The Government has allowed them to get too large. Even a good Libertarian should realize that monopolies do not create a free market. Unfortunately, the Government will have to fix the problem it created. Libertarianism does not exist in a vacuum and in the US, we practice crony capitalism, we must be mindful of that.

File: wmfxv7c0rs4z.jpg (59KB, 738x606px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 738x606px

>>137454468

>>137478512
Privatized gains, socialized losses. Until the losses are privatized, there will not be a small government.

as long as the byproducts of social media (analytics, personal info, etc.) are a hard commodity, free speech will not exist.

>>137455009
This, political censorship on Facebook is akin to telephone companies cutting off your conversations because they don't like what you are saying.

They must be brought to heel.

File: Media.png (3MB, 1600x2004px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1600x2004px

>>137454468
Yes of course. I'm surprised anyone would even consider being against this

>>137454468
yes, at least trust busted

>>137484939

this is different. facebook is just software. it's not the same as something like the power grid, or another utility that requires infrastructure and has relatively large maintenance requirements and hence is "public". faceook is not analogous to a public utility.

see my previous posts. the solution is not to make the part of the government, but to limit the profitability of selling users data.

>>137490304
>requires infrastructure
*consists of infrastructure.

do you people even understand what i'm trying to say?

>>137490304
>facebook is just software.
They rent server farms, google owns them.

>>137458290

Sam Hyde

Samyall White

Sameta Hydreguz

Tsam Son HyDenchi

>>137490304
Should mainstream media news be allowed to lie to the public? Lets say some political corrupt thing occurred, lets say in reality it was found out politicians colluding with a certain company stole tax payer funds and in reality that was entirely true, should the mainstream media and/or facebook and/or google be able to suppress all news associated with this and create their own news stories with fake studies and investigations proving to the viewers that the minority of reports are false and lies?

>>137492005
>They rent server farms, google owns them.

so? my point is that people can get by without large social media companies. designating them a "public utility" is asinine, and compounds the problem by placing their control in the hands of the government, who aren't exactly impartial with regard to political speech.

>>137454468
>>137454850
Especially google owns the Internet at this point. Google needs to be regulated, or would you rather give ((((them)))) a wide platform to show everyone exactly what they need to see?

>>137493050

you're ignoring my suggestion to regulate their business model of selling analytics and user information. this is what needs to be regulated. then the free speech issue solves itself because people will create their own forums with which to communicate, and without necessarily the intent, motive, or means of hoarding as many users as possible.

>>137494780
I didnt mean to ignore what you were saying, I figured that point may be obvious. But I assumed 'the giants of media' will not dissolve their strong hold and user number if that is implemented. You are suggesting they will lose too much revenue (and advertising wont be able to cover) and they will not be able to host all the users and info being the largest suppliers of platform?

>>137495304
>You are suggesting they will lose too much revenue (and advertising wont be able to cover) and they will not be able to host all the users and info being the largest suppliers of platform?

correct. facebook started out as a way for college student to connect with each other, and that's where it should have stayed.

>>137454468
Yes.

Yes, we need the government to step in and show these fuckers who their daddy is.

>>137495304

and without lower-than-dirt, morally bankrupt, asshole internet shills, it would actually be possible.

>>137454468
Bump for interest.

>>137454468
yeah but paul rhino and the rest of the republicucks are not going to go for it.