Big tech rules us all, everywhere
- Thread starter Brushy Bill
- Start date
They just need better competition. They control too much of how folks currently connect with each other, but once other services ramp up and start taking away their market share...they'll either stop the arrogant censorship or face being driven out of business for lack of interest.
The problem is that they use their power to prevent competition, thus over services are prevented from rising up and taking away their market share.
They are certainly free to run their businesses as they see fit, but we as information consumers are also free to bypass them for their lack of open discussion on their forums. I'm a firm believer in robust competition, it keeps everyone honest. Once we see more alternative platforms emerge such as gab.com, rumble, and others....big tech's grip on information will lessen and they will be forced to change or become the next versions of pay telephone booths.
Remember those?
With today's technology platforms this is certainly true. However big tech is not 'hi tech'...and there are currently alternative cloud platforms under construction, as well as alternative distribution networks not dependent on big tech's current infrastructure. We forget 10 years ago many of these services didn't exist! As new technologies emerge, these configurations will give way and their grip will lessen or be replaced by competing services.
As an example, consider what's happening in fiber optic information distribution networks which do not rely on integrated IP configurations to deliver data services. It's still an emerging technological environment, and big tech can't control all of the innovation underway as a response to their attempts at cornering of some information streams.
Last edited:
At one time, he thought this was "hi tech"...and it was because no one else ran the telephone business except Ma Bell.
This is "hi-tech" now, and new companies emerge each year with better, faster, cheaper ways for this little guy to "reach out and touch someone"
This is "hi-tech" now, and new companies emerge each year with better, faster, cheaper ways for this little guy to "reach out and touch someone"
I don't favor breaking them up because of their size, I do favor opening them up to as wide an array of competitors as the free market can sustain.
They control so much of the web services that it stifles competition. It's all USFL versus NFL, Netscape versus Microsoft. Even it you win you lose.
Web services section of Amazon is about the only aspect I can see the merits of breaking it away from the core business. I'm not sure I'm for doing that, but I clearly understand the arguments for doing it.
Considering how important using the web is at this point it seems to me that web services should be a public utility.
I just prefer the idea of open competition with information consumers in charge. AWS built their business model on providing a service. If they want to restrict that service, fine. Let competitors fill the gaps they refuse to provide services for.
I simply disagree. For a time IBM & Microsoft controlled PC operating systems and web navigation. Then along came a company Apple followed by one called Google...with its Chrome web browser. Now Google even has its own O/S for laptops and tablets! Apple also tried to corner the mobile device market until a company called Samsung came along and introduced its competing Android O/S and devices.
Now other software developers are introducing their own O/S versions and devices competing with those giants. As it should be. I don't want to punish successful business plans. I want to free up competition. That's always been the answer to monopolies or folks who try to corner the consumer market.
Let's not start down that road.
That isn’t necessarily a big tech issue. That is a money in politics issue. Fix the money issue and many of this inside and outside of tech magically disappears.
You're right, it just so happens that in this past year the tech companies are the ones that made ALL the money and also just so happen to also be running interference and controlling the discourse for the establishment
Can’t argue with that. Also not arguing that something shouldn’t be done about big tech. Amazon is killing small business and doesn’t pay any taxes. While Twitter allows a few fringe lunatic groups and foreign governments to control the flow of information in our country. I would mind if Twitter fell off the internet this afternoon.
Last edited:
You could be right. I can't say this is a field of expertise for me. I haven't put a lot of study into it. I just think the companies are overly influential and controlling of the market..
When he said they have no accountability he meant in the sense that they have a liability shield since they can't be sued if someone says something on their platform. Users logging on or off isn't the point.
When they decide they don't want someone on their platform they can say "We're a publisher not a platform, so we can kick off whoever we like."
When someone says something on their site that could cause liability issues they can say "We're not a publisher, we're just a platform, if you wanna sue someone then sue the person that said it, not us."
They're legally shielded from liability and that's the problem.
They should be able to be sued, and if so would be better policemen of their own platform. It will cause people to drop the big platforms for other platforms that don't care about being sued, because they are more worried about growing their user base than protecting what they have. That will cause the fragmentation of the large social media sites everyone is asking for.
Not policing yourself and letting people spread lies on your platform is not the answer.
Why? The mainstream media has been allowing it on their networks for years. Why anyone would take verbatim what they see on the internet as factual and not do any research is lunacy to me. It’s a lie a minute coming out of this current whitehouse, no change from the last 4.
I want them trying to lie. I want to see the lies. Your idea is like trying to minority report it out of existence. That’s just not the way it works. Totes looking forward to your version of fascism though! Buhbuhbuhbuh Trump!!!!!!!!
Twitter has banned the My Pillow guy. My point isn't that they shouldn't be allowed to ban the My Pillow guy, my point is that if the My Pillow guy said something on Twitter that was sue-able, Twitter would say "Hey, it's not on us, we just provide a platform, we don't determine the content." Inconsistent. Be a publisher or be a platform provider. Pick one.
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wir...ource_4380645_5_heads_hero_live_headlines_hed
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/wir...ource_4380645_5_heads_hero_live_headlines_hed
My issue here is the biggest lie I can think of in my lifetime was damn near 20 years ago when they said there were WMDs in Iraq to stir up the support for war and we have been there killing people because of that lie ever since. I hope that with the internet and independent media sources we can keep something like that from happening again, but there is an awful lot that people still seem to buy for some reason.
I don't think the internet is the answer to anything unfortunately, because its filled w/ ******* lunatics. A lunatic used to at best find a milk crate and a street corner to yell from. Now its much easier for this crackpots to find themselves and amplify their lies and conspiracy theories. It needs to be monitored. It can't be left unabated, or the divisiveness and domestic terrorism will continue.
I don't think there is a good answer...I don't think government alone can do it and I don't think the social media companies have the interest to do it and if they do attempt to are obviously biased to the left. I guess the best answer is government oversight of them policing themselves, but that isn't perfect. When the right is in control the left will complain and vice versa.
I don’t know that we know for sure we intentionally lied our way into Iraq. There was a lot of Intel being fed to us, some contradictory, as it always is. And I don’t know if you were old enough in the 90s to remember, but we were a hairs breath away from attacking Iraq numerous times between the end of the first gulf war and 03 when the second one started.
If we were going to truly lie our way into one, Iran would be the fight worth having. They definitely deserve to have their *** kicked. Had McCain been elected in 08, I’m about positive we would have collapsed the gap between Iraq and AFG and folded up Iran.
Doubt that competition is the over-riding answer. The 'monopoly' position is so rich and powerful they have (and will continue, unless power is diminished) bought out these upstart competitors. As I see it, we are at another monopoly crises in this Country and the beed for breaking them up (as was the case years ago) is real and acute.
LOL. Eerdoc commenting on anything technology related. You consider bifocals as hi-tech.