DOJ Invites 24 State AGs to Discuss Anti Trust Cases Against Google, Facebook

[EverCurious]

(Shortening post editz)

No, I do not. Twitter, FB and Google do not specifically dictate to you what you're allowed to see, they dictate to you what you're allowed to see on their sites. No different than logging on to this site or Sears website.

Again, if you do not like what Twitter has to offer, move to a different platform.

So because Twitter and FB are discriminating everyone all the millions and billions who don't want their friends hand picked by some random person, should move to a platform that doesn't exist? Would you say that about power, sewer, water, electric, natural gas, cable TV, telephone, and ISP as well?

So, where does it end? What cannot be put under the umbrella of "public good"? Sugar is bad for you, should we regulate it like a drug for the "public good"?

Utilities are regulated because in most cases there are zero alternatives. I have no choices where to get my water from, there is only one option. I have a few "choices" as far as a electric provider, but even those are just superficial as it is the same company making the eclectic no matter who "provides" it.

Nobody is being silenced, everyone can still have a voice, they just might have to move that voice. You have a right to free speech, but that does not mean you have the right to come into my house and say anything you like. Me shutting you up in my own house does not take away your freedom of speech.

Depends on when we can put freedom of speech back into American culture, sorry, not sure when the left will see that what they are doing is wrong.

For the record, I have one electric option, I have one natural gas option, I have one cable TV option (we have dish up here but the mountain blocks my angle), I have two ISP options (cable and phone line options so basically yeah one), and I have zero water and sewer options. (In trade I have almost an acre, back up to a large easement, actually have a paved road that gets plowed, and I have the best mail man ever heh)

Do stores have a right to control what is said on their property? Does a private business have the right to say "no profanity" in their place of business?

The difference between sites like FB and Twitter and phone companies is content. There is no content with a phone call like there is with a FB post or a tweet. While we may not hold these companies responsible legally (though congress is trying) they are held responsible for their content in the court of public opinion, which is the most vital thing for them. They make decisions based upon their business needs, and from the results they seem to know what they are doing.

The bottom line for me is that if you do not like the results from Google search, use a different search engine. If you do not like what FB does to your post, use a different social media site. Let the market dictate this sort of thing, not the government.

mmk so let me get this straight. I have to move myself, and convince all my friends to move every time the platform I'm using decides my views are not approved and bans my speech. Okay, and what happens when the next site decides I don't have freedom of speech on their platform? And the next one? And the next one? Essentially what you are saying is that the only way that I can legitimately enforce my freedom of speech, is to open my own site and force my friends to come to it.

Meanwhile, telephones and cellphones are regulated because the platform, the infrastructure, is considered to be quasi-public square and unreasonable to expect every single person to replace thus it has some limited regulation to ensure that freedom of speech is allowed.

Sorry, you've not convinced me that we cannot safely/fairly do the same with the "natural monopolies" of social media, search engines, and YouTube - and let us keep in mind that all of these companies have stated that they are public squares and basically submitted themselves to government regulation, or at least stated they think it might be necessary.

 

[EverCurious]

Allow me to expand a bit on why we regulate utilities to answer this. Electric, natural gas, water, sewer, telephone and cable are all considered to be psudo public use because they have a "natural monopolies" (the grid, the lines, the air waves, etc) and it's not financially viable, nor desirable, to duplicate that infrastructure.

Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and search engines are in a similar position. They've gained "natural monopolies" very much like MS did, people like their products, it's the "standard" it's what nearly everyone uses to get shit done.

We do not argue, that simply because someone "could" install a solar panel on their house, the electric company can refuse to service their house because they don't agree with the home owners political or social viewpoints. We do not argue, that simply because someone could install a private well and septic, the water/wastewater utility can decide not to serve them if they're Hispanic. We also do not argue, that simply because someone could chose a different telephone company, so AT&T can choose not to allow Democrats to use their phone lines.

Quite frankly, I don't need some social justice twat sifting through my fucking friends to decide whom I can keep in contact with. We would never fucking accept this from a cellphone provider, why the hell should we for social media?

The problem with your comparison is that there is no "natural monopoly" as there is no infrastructure to duplicate. The internet that any search engine searches is the exact same internet that Google searches. FB does not keep anyone off of the internet, it keeps people and post out of it venue, not unlike physical venues do. The local sports arena has never allowed a KKK rally or a Black Panther rally.

Basically these internet companies are being punished for their success.

Same thing the government is trying to do to Amazon

God dammit, how did we end up in two fricking posts again?!?

As to the "natural monopoly" argument, see my note in the first post, also there's actually /two/ infrastructures. The first america gave to the world, that's the "physical" bit. As for the second, have you ever seen the code for search engines, FB, YT, and Twitter? That's hella infrastructure, like seriously, it's fucking beautiful (I'm a geek...)

How does it "punish" them exactly? It's not like they're fucking paying to use the wires and cables we tax payers put in for em, in fact, they're making bank off it. It's not too much to ask that they respect the laws and traditions of fucking America - especially when it's freedom of speech, which they all claim they support.

Amazon? Seriously? Are you... uhm, not paying attention? Maybe you missed it... So this is what Bezos says about it:

"For me again, this is one of those things where I focus on and ask our teams to focus on what we can control, and I expect - whether it's the current US administration or any other government agency around the world - Amazon is now a large corporation and I expect us to be scrutinized. We should be scrutinized. I think all large institutions should be scrutinized and examined. It's reasonable. And one thing to note about is that we have gotten big in absolute terms only very recently. So we've always been growing very fast in percentage terms, but in 2010 just 8 years ago, we had 30,000 employees. So in the last 8 years we've gone from 30,000 employees to 560,000 employees. You know in my mind I'm still delivering the packages to the post office myself. You see what I'm saying? I still have all the memories of hoping that one day we could afford a forklift. So obviously my intellectual brain knows that's just not the case anymore. We have 560,000 employees all over the world. And I know we should be scrutinized and I think it's true that big government institutions should be scrutinized, big non-profit institutions should be scrutinized, big universities should be scrutinized. It just makes sense. And that's, by the way, why the work at the "Washington Post" and all other great newspapers around the world do is so important. They are often the ones doing that initial scrutiny, even before the government agencies do."

[...] Hell even on "breaking them up" he says:

"I think it's a natural instinct, I think we humans, especially in the western world, and especially inside democracies are wired to be skeptical and mindful of large institutions of any kind. We're skeptical always of our government in the United States, state governments and local governments. I assume it's similar in Germany. It's healthy, because they're big, powerful institutions - the police, the military, or whatever it is. It doesn't mean you don't trust them, or that they're bad or evil or anything like that. It's just that they have a lot of power and control, and so you want to inspect them. Maybe that's a better word. You kind of want to always be inspecting them. And if you look at the big tech companies, they have gotten large enough that they need and are going to be inspected. And by the way, it's not personal. I think you can go astray on this if you're the founder of a company - one of these big tech companies, or any other big institution. If you go astray on this, you might start to take it personally. Like "Why are you someone inspecting me?" And I wish that people would just say, "Yes, it's fine".


Don't worry about Amazon son, they're fine with it, because they get it, they're /responsible/ businesses - and if we're going to be shit honest about Amazon here, it's actually good for them in particular because it would give them serious global credibility which is probably the only possible hurdle they might really have. Consumers who fear they're a scam or shit, having a government stamp of approval or something would actually give them /more/ market. That's not even talking about the massive deals they have with the gov moving shit for em already, plus the post office right (sometimes I think Amazon is basically the only force keeping them alive heh)


I don't mean to be rude, but are you sure you're not just like knee jerking the "OMG GOV BAD" thing a little bit? I mean I'm a capitalist and so are these folks you're "protecting" but you seem to be missing that sometimes it's actually good to regulate. Not everything, of course not, and not taking over, but there is a balance that most business owners are not only fine with, but welcome...

 

[Harpy Eagle]

(Shortening post editz)
So because Twitter and FB are discriminating everyone all the millions and billions who don't want their friends hand picked by some random person, should move to a platform that doesn't exist? Would you say that about power, sewer, water, electric, natural gas, cable TV, telephone, and ISP as well?

You are very confused as to what FB and Twitter do. They do not pick your friends for you and they have shut up all conservatives like you are pretending. 75% of my family and more than 50% of my friends on FB are die hard conservatives and none of them have been silenced and FB has not stopped be from being friends with them.

You being over dramatic does not help the discussion.

Depends on when we can put freedom of speech back into American culture, sorry, not sure when the left will see that what they are doing is wrong.

For the record, I have one electric option, I have one natural gas option, I have one cable TV option (we have dish up here but the mountain blocks my angle), I have two ISP options (cable and phone line options so basically yeah one), and I have zero water and sewer options. (In trade I have almost an acre, back up to a large easement, actually have a paved road that gets plowed, and I have the best mail man ever heh)
.

Free speech is a function of the government, not private enterprises. Free speech has never left the American culture, in fact we have more avenues for people to be heard than ever. Every website has rules and if you wish to use that site you have to follow the rules. I spend a number of years on a Christian website, they have very strict rules about language and speaking ill of Trump would get a person banned, even though they claimed to be non-political. By your standard they are violating my free speech. Which of course is ludicrous.

mmk so let me get this straight. I have to move myself, and convince all my friends to move every time the platform I'm using decides my views are not approved and bans my speech. Okay, and what happens when the next site decides I don't have freedom of speech on their platform? And the next one? And the next one? Essentially what you are saying is that the only way that I can legitimately enforce my freedom of speech, is to open my own site and force my friends to come to it.

Yes. This site has banned my speech and given me a week's vacation, so my choice then was to abide by the sites wishes or find another forum. If your own site is worthwhile you should not need to force your friends to come to it. Your friends are free to choose, just like you are.

Meanwhile, telephones and cellphones are regulated because the platform, the infrastructure, is considered to be quasi-public square and unreasonable to expect every single person to replace thus it has some limited regulation to ensure that freedom of speech is allowed.

Once again you are comparing apples to oranges. FB and Google and Twitter and this broad are all just storefronts that are using the infrastructure, they are not the infrastructure.

Sorry, you've not convinced me that we cannot safely/fairly do the same with the "natural monopolies" of social media, search engines, and YouTube - and let us keep in mind that all of these companies have stated that they are public squares and basically submitted themselves to government regulation, or at least stated they think it might be necessary.

I am not here to convince anyone of anything, that is a fools errand on an internet forum. People who come to a forum like this already have their mind made up, nobody is going to change that.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

God dammit, how did we end up in two fricking posts again?!?

As to the "natural monopoly" argument, see my note in the first post, also there's actually /two/ infrastructures. The first america gave to the world, that's the "physical" bit. As for the second, have you ever seen the code for search engines, FB, YT, and Twitter? That's hella infrastructure, like seriously, it's fucking beautiful (I'm a geek...)

You are welcome to call their coding their infrastructure, but it does not fall under the umbrella of not being financially viable, nor desirable, to duplicate that infrastructure. Coding is not like power lines or TV cable for which there is limited physical space to put them.

How does it "punish" them exactly? It's not like they're fucking paying to use the wires and cables we tax payers put in for em, in fact, they're making bank off it. It's not too much to ask that they respect the laws and traditions of fucking America - especially when it's freedom of speech, which they all claim they support.

You do not think a company being broken up into multiple smaller companies is a punishment? Of course it is, and it always has been. We punish companies for being too successful.

I am amazed at how many people do not grasp the most basic fact that freedom of speech is a function of the government, not private enterprise. Read the 1st Amendment, it says that government is not allowed to deny or abridge, nothing in there about you or I or FB.

Amazon? Seriously? Are you... uhm, not paying attention? Maybe you missed it... So this is what Bezos says about it:

Don't worry about Amazon son, they're fine with it, because they get it, they're /responsible/ businesses - and if we're going to be shit honest about Amazon here, it's actually good for them in particular because it would give them serious global credibility which is probably the only possible hurdle they might really have. Consumers who fear they're a scam or shit, having a government stamp of approval or something would actually give them /more/ market. That's not even talking about the massive deals they have with the gov moving shit for em already, plus the post office right (sometimes I think Amazon is basically the only force keeping them alive heh)

Yes, Amazon. Perhaps you missed it but they are in the sights of our current president, he again wants to punish them for being to successful. Amazon, just like FB and Twitter control what is on their site, they do not allow anything to be sold, they censure the messages that can be displayed on goods sold on their site. Thus they are, by your standard, abridging free speech. If FB and Twitter should be forced to allow any and all content on their sites, then Amazon should be forced to sell anything anyone wants to sell.

I don't mean to be rude, but are you sure you're not just like knee jerking the "OMG GOV BAD" thing a little bit? I mean I'm a capitalist and so are these folks you're "protecting" but you seem to be missing that sometimes it's actually good to regulate. Not everything, of course not, and not taking over, but there is a balance that most business owners are not only fine with, but welcome...

A little regulation is good, but it should always be kept to the minimum, the government rarely makes things better with their "one size fits all" regulations. I am an amateur baker/chef and nutmeg is good and can add a unique taste. Too much of it can kill you, just like too much regulation.

Not to be rude back, but I am not really sure you are a capitalist.

 

[EverCurious]

You are very confused as to what FB and Twitter do. They do not pick your friends for you and they have shut up all conservatives like you are pretending. 75% of my family and more than 50% of my friends on FB are die hard conservatives and none of them have been silenced and FB has not stopped be from being friends with them.

You being over dramatic does not help the discussion.

Over dramatic? Really? What if my friend is Alex Jones or that #Walkaway guy? What if a buddy from high school is a hard-line "traditional" conservative? He got banned for telling someone that abortion was murder. What if another friend got banned simply for sharing an Alex Jones post? Ironically that one was a liberal.

You /sure/ FB's not picking my friends for me because it sure as hell seems they are from my perspective.

And yeah, sure, I'll just give them a call on the cellphone - where they're not banned for disagreeing with the new political "religion" of the left...

Free speech is a function of the government, not private enterprises. Free speech has never left the American culture, in fact we have more avenues for people to be heard than ever. Every website has rules and if you wish to use that site you have to follow the rules. I spend a number of years on a Christian website, they have very strict rules about language and speaking ill of Trump would get a person banned, even though they claimed to be non-political. By your standard they are violating my free speech. Which of course is ludicrous.

Yes. This site has banned my speech and given me a week's vacation, so my choice then was to abide by the sites wishes or find another forum. If your own site is worthwhile you should not need to force your friends to come to it. Your friends are free to choose, just like you are.

Once again you are comparing apples to oranges. FB and Google and Twitter and this broad are all just storefronts that are using the infrastructure, they are not the infrastructure.

Again, you ignore that FB, Twitter, Google, YouTube have organically developed into "monopolies" and try to compare them to a site that has what a couple thousand users vs BILLIONS.

I am not here to convince anyone of anything, that is a fools errand on an internet forum. People who come to a forum like this already have their mind made up, nobody is going to change that.

Seriously!? Thanks for wasting my fucking time asshole. Welcome to my ignore list.

 

[hazlnut]

Bust them into ten thousand million pieces.

DOJ Invites 24 State AGs to Jeff Sessions Meeting About Breaking Up Google, Facebook

they invite a bunch of state AGs for show, no anti-trust case here.

Breaking them up into what?

How many other search engines and social media platforms are there that consumers can use?

Think, before posting...