Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24
[#] Sat Dec 12 2020 16:08:32 EST from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Youtube needed to die in a fire long ago. After their latest
bullshit, everyone who works there needs to be dragged from the
building, tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail. Then

YouTube is problematic for the same reason Microsoft was problematic 20 years ago: they may not *technically* hold a monopoly, but their dominance of the space is so complete that anyone banned from YouTube is essentially locked out of reaching any significant audience for video publishing.

YouTube's latest announcement cannot be construed as anything less than bald-faced censorship. Their ban of videos which affirm that there was fraud in the election is clearly an editorial decision. Where else are you going to go?
I am on BitChute and poke around there a bit, it's still the best place to follow Styxhexenhammer666 (he happens to be their #1 creator) but when I sit down to watch random videos, it's still all about YouTube.

Simply repealing Section 230 is *not* the answer. As Styx and others have pointed out, that would simply lead the giants to aggressively police their posts with AI, basically treating wrongthink as spam and blocking it, while smaller sites would essentially be snuffed out. It would basically be a massive chilling effect, which is exactly what the beasts of silicon valley would need to cement their positions.

Look instead to H.R.8922, the "Break Up Big Tech Act of 2020", introduced by Reps. Tulsi Gabbard and Paul Gosar [ https://gabbard.house.gov/news/press-releases/reps-gabbard-gosar-introduce-break-big-tech-bill-remove-legal-immunity-big-tech ] which would take away legal immunity from interactive computer service providers that engage in certain manipulative activities, including social media companies who act as publishers by moderating and censoring content.

Yup. I don't care if Tulsi is a democrat, she NAILED THIS. 230 is essential for sites that have user generated content, but the big guys are abusing it, and this bill hits the correct solution right on the money.

[#] Sun Dec 13 2020 11:54:42 EST from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

So... 

Part of me says that abuses like this leads to innovation. What all the big social media companies are doing is trying to control and manipulate market forces and ignore the market demand. We've seen MySpace and Digg fail to understand this and go from dominance to irrelevance. Verizon has fought this for decades, and has generally lost. People in the 80s and 90s thought we needed to do all kinds of drastic things to deal with Microsoft - and eventually, it was their inattention to responding to market demands that undid them. 

Specifically - Microsoft was so entrenched in a "we need to appear professional-grade," mindset that they largely considered mass-consumer markets secondary. With Windows CE and PDAs, as they began to morph into smartphones - Microsoft insisted on being Corporate Oriented and actually actively discouraged casual/leisure consumer-use models for these platforms. I was at Intel, arguing loudly that we needed to be promoting that market with things like the Compaq/HP iPaqs - which were IDEAL little portable gaming rigs. Intel, for their part, actually pursued this - and came back saying, "Microsoft says that is not their product roadmap for these products and the Windows Mobile platform." 

Then Apple came with the iPhone and sold specifically to casual/leisure consumer markets - and eventually became so overwhelming, they put everyone else - Palm, Motorola, Microsoft, Intel, Blackberry - out of the personal smart device market - and from there, forced their way by sheer numbers back into the enterprise. 

So... if repealing section 230 actually puts the giants in a superior position, allowing them a blank check to censor anything they think could be problematic while also snuffing out competition - why are they so AGAINST repealing it? Certainly they have bright enough minds to see that getting section 230 repealed is actually in their best interests? 

I also wonder if it would really have any effect on us, anyhow. I feel like we've always been kind of black-market, pirate radio segments of online services. Literally, we're the places where the anarchist cookbook, 2600 instructions, blackbox cable schematics, 3D printed contraband - where the contraband flows. We're not the darknet - but we're certainly greynet and small enough to generally not get noticed unless we're engaging in flagrant and/or very illegal activities. I don't think that would change much if 230 was repealed. We might have to be more careful about having our content locked down to non-authenticated accounts, making accounts require verification, and only letting in trusted users - to avoid the Karens that would red-flag us... we've always existed with those kind of concerns - though. The difference is, now there are individuals actively looking for voices they oppose to try and get them silenced - and instead of your local community it is the entire world of those people you have to worry about. 



H.R.8922 sounds good. If it were Tulsi vs. Romney in 2024 - I'd break ranks. The Democrats will probably prevent either from ever being a possibility. 


Sat Dec 12 2020 16:08:32 EST from IGnatius T Foobar

.. their dominance of the space is so complete that anyone banned from YouTube is essentially locked out of reaching any significant audience for video publishing.

Simply repealing Section 230 is *not* the answer. As Styx and others have pointed out, that would simply lead the giants to aggressively police their posts with AI, basically treating wrongthink as spam and blocking it, while smaller sites would essentially be snuffed out. It would basically be a massive chilling effect, which is exactly what the beasts of silicon valley would need to cement their positions.

Look instead to H.R.8922, the "Break Up Big Tech Act of 2020"...  

Yup. I don't care if Tulsi is a democrat... but the big guys are abusing it, and this bill hits the correct solution...

 



[#] Mon Dec 14 2020 11:41:10 EST from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

So pretty much a complete crash this morning, worldwide. EXCEPT ads.. go figure..  The error i was getting was funny " not connected to the internet" um, google you are NOT the internet, as much as you may think you are.

Also interesting that people reported that some things worked in incognito mode. Sounds like their tracking service took a dive, so everything else was dead without that feed of data. Bad coding.

 

https://www.theverge.com/2020/12/14/22173803/gmail-youtube-google-assistant-docs-down-outage



[#] Sat Dec 26 2020 14:31:31 EST from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

It was their authentication system that broke, so anything requiring authentication was locking out users. The ad system doesn't require authentication, so ads were served anyway.

[#] Sun Dec 27 2020 19:12:55 EST from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Well, the ads must go on... 

 

Sat Dec 26 2020 14:31:31 EST from IGnatius T Foobar
It was their authentication system that broke, so anything requiring authentication was locking out users. The ad system doesn't require authentication, so ads were served anyway.

 



[#] Tue Jan 05 2021 15:12:06 EST from zooer

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

[#] Tue Jan 05 2021 15:29:32 EST from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The snake eats itself. 

 

Tue Jan 05 2021 15:12:06 EST from zooer

 



[#] Tue Jan 05 2021 17:13:59 EST from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


I heard about this earlier in the week. For a brief, fleeting moment I hoped that this union was being formed to resist Google's suppression of employees who didn't toe the line of "typical Silicon Valley mentality". Unfortunately, it's exactly the opposite. They're hyper-hippies who want Google to cancel all of its military contracts.

Just when you thought it couldn't get any weirder.

[#] Tue Jan 05 2021 22:02:41 EST from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I've heard compelling arguments that the IT industry got effed because it resisted unionization because it was primarily a bunch of libertarian minded white males. 

But, I think we were effed either way - it was just about how we were going to take it. 

 

Tue Jan 05 2021 17:13:59 EST from IGnatius T Foobar

I heard about this earlier in the week. For a brief, fleeting moment I hoped that this union was being formed to resist Google's suppression of employees who didn't toe the line of "typical Silicon Valley mentality". Unfortunately, it's exactly the opposite. They're hyper-hippies who want Google to cancel all of its military contracts.

Just when you thought it couldn't get any weirder.

 



[#] Wed Jan 06 2021 05:04:30 EST from nonservator

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I am shocked, shocked, to find El Goog following Cthulu and swimming further to the left.

 

(maniacal laughter intensifies)

 

Someone else said: "It's like watching your worst enemy dating your crazy ex. And then you remember your ex has copies of all your keys and knows all your passwords."



[#] Wed Jan 06 2021 07:49:58 EST from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I have worked in union shops before ( not in a union since i was IT, just at companies who were ) and i think we ( IT people ) were/are far better off without one in the long run, regardless of why it never happened.

While i totally agree unions had their place at one point, now they are mostly oppressive overhead that often hurts both businesses and members.  I have seen a couple of companies go bankrupt solely due to the union. I worked at one place where the union tried to force themselves in, and the hourly workers told them to get off the property.

Now they dont have to be pointless and could still provide value, but from the ones i have seen, that isn't happening anymore.

Tue Jan 05 2021 22:02:41 EST from ParanoidDelusions

I've heard compelling arguments that the IT industry got effed because it resisted unionization because it was primarily a bunch of libertarian minded white males. 

 



[#] Wed Jan 06 2021 10:18:07 EST from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Oh, I agree. It would have been bad for the industry. Equality Initiatives and Offshore Outsourcing - in retrospect - I would have rather seen the companies pay for it through the teeth. 
I like to tell this story. I joined Intel in 2001 on an aggressive initiative to turn Intel into a "100% eBiz company by 2003." The idea was that Intel was still doing a lot of their business on paper - and they wanted every transaction, from every supplier, every vendor, every customer, to be handled electronically - even internal acquisitions - through Intel managed systems. 

So, I'd deploy a server in the datacenter, it would get stable. A few months later, I'd be walking through one of the buildings in Folsom - and a whole department that used to be busy and bustling was empty and abandoned - like a ghost-ship. Things would still be sitting around on empty desks - it looked like the rapture might have happened, in just that group. 

That happened 3 or 4 times before I correlated what I was making happening with what I was seeing result. 

And that is when I realized what was going to happen to me once we got to that 2003 goal. 

We got there, on time - and I was right. 

If a Union would have made this suck for Intel - I would have supported a union *just for that reason, alone*. 


Wed Jan 06 2021 07:49:58 EST from Nurb432

I have worked in union shops before ( not in a union since i was IT, just at companies who were ) and i think we ( IT people ) were/are far better off without one in the long run, regardless of why it never happened.

While i totally agree unions had their place at one point, now they are mostly oppressive overhead that often hurts both businesses and members.  I have seen a couple of companies go bankrupt solely due to the union. I worked at one place where the union tried to force themselves in, and the hourly workers told them to get off the property.

Now they dont have to be pointless and could still provide value, but from the ones i have seen, that isn't happening anymore.

Tue Jan 05 2021 22:02:41 EST from ParanoidDelusions

I've heard compelling arguments that the IT industry got effed because it resisted unionization because it was primarily a bunch of libertarian minded white males. 

 



 



[#] Wed Jan 06 2021 13:31:02 EST from IGnatius T Foobar

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

It could be argued that unions are bad for both the workers and the companies, and by that standard, Google deserves to be unionized. So do all of the silicon valley pigopolies.

It's a shame that real unions, as they came to be during the industrial revolution, no longer exist. They could lead the fight against offshoring. They could lead the fight against censorship. They could lead the fight against corruption.

[#] Wed Jan 06 2021 14:10:54 EST from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Yup. I don't see any problem with workers using their collective bargaining power to counter the consolidated power of the companies they work for, in general. It is in specific application that Unions tend to fall down. 

 

Wed Jan 06 2021 13:31:02 EST from IGnatius T Foobar
It could be argued that unions are bad for both the workers and the companies, and by that standard, Google deserves to be unionized. So do all of the silicon valley pigopolies.

It's a shame that real unions, as they came to be during the industrial revolution, no longer exist. They could lead the fight against offshoring. They could lead the fight against censorship. They could lead the fight against corruption.

 



[#] Wed Jan 06 2021 17:37:28 EST from darknetuser

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

2021-01-06 13:31 from IGnatius T Foobar
It could be argued that unions are bad for both the workers and the

companies, and by that standard, Google deserves to be unionized. So

do all of the silicon valley pigopolies.

It's a shame that real unions, as they came to be during the
industrial revolution, no longer exist. They could lead the fight

against offshoring. They could lead the fight against censorship.

They could lead the fight against corruption.



In Marxist terms, entrepeneurs hold the monopoly of the means of production.


In my terms, Unions attempt to monopolize manpower.

The problem is Unions only are powerful if they have actual monopoly. If an Union struck a deal with a firm and then a bunch of dudes from the street arrived to the firm and offered the boss to work for half the price the Union had agreed to, the Union's power would be undermined.

Which is why Unions have to cancell and threaten and supress people who does not follow the party line. Or, as they do in a lot of countries, they get the government to make Union deals enforcable for employees that are not members of the Unions.

[#] Thu Jan 07 2021 17:08:50 EST from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Right, that is why i hate to sound like i'm bashing the idea as i do feel they serve a good purpose when they are properly run and not just a power/cash grab.   Just so many have strayed from the true mission and are now as evil and corrupt as everything else.

 

Wed Jan 06 2021 13:31:02 EST from IGnatius T Foobar
It could be argued that unions are bad for both the workers and the companies, and by that standard, Google deserves to be unionized. So do all of the silicon valley pigopolies.

It's a shame that real unions, as they came to be during the industrial revolution, no longer exist. They could lead the fight against offshoring. They could lead the fight against censorship. They could lead the fight against corruption.

 



[#] Thu Jan 07 2021 17:36:48 EST from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Pretty sure they all stray.

The taste of power is intoxicating, and the desire to go too far with it is irresistible.

I'm pretty sure everything you need to know about our current situation, Tolkien described in Lord of the Rings.

 

Thu Jan 07 2021 17:08:50 EST from Nurb432

Right, that is why i hate to sound like i'm bashing the idea as i do feel they serve a good purpose when they are properly run and not just a power/cash grab.   Just so many have strayed from the true mission and are now as evil and corrupt as everything else.

 

Wed Jan 06 2021 13:31:02 EST from IGnatius T Foobar
It could be argued that unions are bad for both the workers and the companies, and by that standard, Google deserves to be unionized. So do all of the silicon valley pigopolies.

It's a shame that real unions, as they came to be during the industrial revolution, no longer exist. They could lead the fight against offshoring. They could lead the fight against censorship. They could lead the fight against corruption.

 



 



[#] Fri Jan 08 2021 20:02:40 EST from Nurb432

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I dont think i would, as i have had limited power and it never got into my head. Even backed away from it intentionally. I'd like the opportunity to find out about massive power tho :)  

Thu Jan 07 2021 17:36:48 EST from ParanoidDelusions

Pretty sure they all stray.

The taste of power is intoxicating, and the desire to go too far with it is irresistible.




[#] Sat Jan 09 2021 00:06:27 EST from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The guy you want in power is the guy who refuses it. The guy you get in power is the guy who accepts it. It is one of those universal paradoxes. 

Fri Jan 08 2021 20:02:40 EST from Nurb432

I dont think i would, 



[#] Sat Jan 09 2021 00:08:02 EST from ParanoidDelusions

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Again, The Tolkien world nailed this - with Gladrieal. The one who refuses the ring, is probably the only one who could wield it. 

Sat Jan 09 2021 00:06:27 EST from ParanoidDelusions

The guy you want in power is the guy who refuses it. The guy you get in power is the guy who accepts it. It is one of those universal paradoxes. 

Fri Jan 08 2021 20:02:40 EST from Nurb432

I dont think i would, 



 



Go to page: First ... 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24