U.S. exec order directs agencies to pursue net neutrality, antitrust action, ISP competition and right to repair

A lot of promise in this directive which could lead to good things if it’s realized. Looking forward to it.

1 Like

Combined with Trumps class-action lawsuit there’s a lot of heat going towards big tech right now.

Interesting words from a party who censors through Big Tech and the media.

3 Likes

What I fear is the acknowledgement by big tech that breakup is inevitable which changes their strategy to lobbying and promoting friendly politicians (or a party) to get them to “break up” big tech in a way they can dictate; similar to everyone’s promise to clean up the banking sector as dictated by heads of the banking sector.

I was careful to use the words “promise” and “if it’s realized” for that reason. I’m a bit World-weary but to the degree this is genuine i’ll cheer for anyone who gets the job done.

3 Likes

I hate to get all political but look at Biden’s affiliations.

If the big tech breakup is going to happen I’m sure they’re glad that JB is the one steering the ship while it happens. After all big tech silenced his opposition and contributed hefty amounts of money to Democrats in the past election.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/02/tech-billionaire-2020-election-donations-final-tally.html
https://observer.com/2020/11/big-tech-2020-presidential-election-donation-breakdown-ranking/
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/big-tech-trump-biden-contributions

Don’t forget the favor big tech did for Joe when it came to Hunter’s laptop.
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2020/12/09/pollak-mainstream-media-big-tech-coverup-collapses-with-hunter-biden-investigation-laptop/

Whether you think it’s a conspiracy or not why wouldn’t Joe send big tech a nice big gift basket? Hope for the best, prepare for the worst. I am glad to see the attention this executive order draws to the issue, it’s definitely a step in the right direction. There’s also some nice stuff about right to repair in there as well. He’s not the first one to call out big tech but kudos for taking it a couple steps further.

2 Likes

They do not censor through big tech!! You sound like you are falling for the “sovereign Citizen”, Qanon and other conspiracy BS!!!

If you are going to make claims about legal issues you should start by learning something about our laws, and I don’t mean from social media dimwits who have no clue what they are talking about!

  1. Private businesses must adhere to federal and state laws, but ARE NOT BOUND to those constitutional statutes the GOVERNMENT cannot engage in, censorship being one of them, and proposing it is common in politics, and has been done for centuries throughout all of politics and by all parties in one form or another, but the senate and congress so far has upheld the constitution, and not obliged those who call for it. Furthermore, in cases like bullying or any speech that does real harm (mental harm is a real thing), you can be prosecuted, but not for what you said, but rather for the harm you caused, and that is not only the right thing to do, but fully legally justified as proclaimed in the Declaration Of Independence via the constitution, and your freaking right to swing your arms wildly ends when aimed at others faces!

Social media, forums, IPS… are not owned by the government, but private entities mostly in the form of corporations, for which the US Corporate code is the law, and they can censor any speech they want to, but of course it doesn’t help their business to be over the top with it, and it would be impossible to do it manually, so they use technology to filter out potentially harmful behavior, with software that is by no means perfect yet!

  1. The WWW is a protocol not the internet AKA the global infrastructure that connects everyone, which was built by information service providers and other tech companies with private and federal funds in the best interest of the global public, and no one owns it! It is not “American” (a continent, not the U.S.A). It is governed differently in every country according to their jurisdictions and laws. the WWW although colloquially but wrongly referred to as the internet, is not owned by the government or any big tech, but by the person who invented it: Sir Timothy John Berners-Lee, and up for sale as we speak as far as I know. It is either licensed or otherwise protected and supposed to be governed by whoever he gave the authority. According to that it is “Always and for as long as it exists, to stay neutral”, and ISP’s and other tech have grossly abused it and not complied!

The Internet is, in a way, more of a concept than a physical entity. No person has a patent or copyright over the internet, but any tech contribution to it can be, and many have proprietary rights to their contributions, and many others have open sourced their contribution, including The Linux foundation, Free Software foundation, even Big tech like Google and Microsoft… the two former do it through the board, whereas the two latter seam to be doing it to look good more than anything, and also have proprietary technology there too, and control it and it’s users vigorously which I see as hypocritical, and dishonest as all get go. It’s all in the licensing, and it’s about high time someone makes them stop abusing the privilege.

And FYI: Trump was also in favor of it, but was too busy being a narcissist serving his own personal interests to do jack about it, and also tried his best to censor anyone in his way, and in despicable ways too.

Stop drinking the koolaid, and take a few years binging on how the US government works, our various laws, the constitution, the letters of our forefathers… in the library of congress, and not on YouTube for humanities sake!

Now I bet deep down you wish someone will censor this reply!

1 Like

They don’t huh?

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Thursday the Biden administration is identifying “problematic” posts for Facebook to censor because they contain “misinformation” about COVID-19.

People really need to stop allowing themselves be told what to think, and start to think for themselves.

All this collusion, and censoring of the opposition could be considered in-kind assistance, and violation of US election laws.

Actually, I am against net neutrality. What if I want to start my own ISP? By having regulations, it makes it harder for small people to start something.

The good part of not having net neutrality is let them limit people’s internet. I come along and offer a competing package with no limits, or restrictions.

I like where you’re going, but it’s not that easy.

I’d love to see you start a competing company and put youtube out of business.

Meh, it’s all of the internet and even in some of the news outlets that are known to censor, as someone already shared.

I don’t facebook, twitter, or use any other social media outlet except for LinkedIn, which I only use for job related functions, and a couple of linux discourse forums like this one. I don’t watch any specific news or media propaganda shows. My opinion comes from, and only from, my own research. I don’t rely on most internet posts because most posts do not document their sources and without sources to verify their content, their post becomes merely an opinion and nothing else.

With that being said, maybe you should seek to understand me before you make assumptions.

Oh, and to your last question. I am against all censorship, including your message. I value everyone’s opinion, but others opinions don’t necessarily influence my own opinion. So, if you have an opinion on the topic, I’ve love to hear it. It might influence me to do some research.

2 Likes

I see you either didn’t understand, a word I was saying, or you just came to push an agenda and preach, and aren’t even interested what may be necessary to protect the life and liberty of the public, only your agenda, and why it absolutely must be balanced with the right to free speech, which in a way gives you by proxy right to be stupid or just plain wrong, and spread misinformation and lies as fact to others of like mind, even if it’s not your intention.

So its the legal implications like the constitution written at a time where they could not possibly foresee some of it’s flaws, and should be limits, for which via the senate and congress, and WE THE PEOPLE it allows the facility to be amended, which is what they are rightfully pursuing for not just the US sake, but hopefully for other jurisdictions to adopt for sake of all humanity, where another insane conspiracy comes in: The idea of a world government which is only a conceptual system for humanities, and not a conspiracy of gaining world domination for THEY’s sake whoever they are: Conspiracy theorists have no clue or common consensus about “THEY” even are!

You also fail on considering thesocial implications of what “Thinking for ones self” not being at minimum combated when it comes to the loss of life and liberty to others where you fail miserably to come to sound conclusions:

When people who do not understand something like “The germ theory of disease”, evolution, biology, chemistry… and the subsequent understanding of immunology, for which an army of specialists through “The Scientific Method” behind it who often dedicate their entire lives to finding cures and methods to combat diseases, and have saved countless more people than just themselves with and throughout these many fields existence and have and are making ever more progress in figuring out how these things come about in nature to the point we can control it, and then some disgruntled, physician/Lawyer combo with no education or true understanding of any of those fields figured out a way to spread a completely false hypothesis as “Scientifically sound theory” and how many millions of $ were spent to investigate his claims only to debunk every aspect more than sufficiently withing less than a decade, only for others with the same lack of education, understanding and equal or greater cognitive bias adopted his BS as gospel (look up how and where it started…). and finally the

There’s a lot more to unravel here, but I have a busy business to run, and so just this one, which you should definitely take to heart: Scientific journalism is for reporting on the scientific research and findings, NOT at all authorities on science itself, and they misinterpret or misuse even the simplest terms like “May be” with “Is the case”, “We believe” with “We know for sure” (always a fallacious claim according to the scientific method as new information is always to be found)… in reading scientific papers. Many scientific journals (and the list is growing), are pure money making ventures the internet makes all too easy to exist, many which that the scientific community does not accept, because there is no regulation, instead they only accept those that are honest to a fault and diligent to not misuse language and meaning, what and, and how they publish, and know better not to, that do not conflate the colloquial meaning of the word theory with “Scientific theory” which has only one very specific meaning, and it’s all too easy to do as even scientists themselves use both, but it’s the context and other use of language that separates the two, that tells you which meaning they are using at any given time. Also, there are many “Scientific papers” you can pull one out of your ass at will, and so what you are calling “Sources” are just that, and anyone can be a source of information, but that has no bearing on whether the INFORMATION is any good at all! There are not for profit politically and religiously neutral organizations that rank scientific journals as to their credibility, likeliness to make mistakes, and most of all, vet and verify vigorously what they publish, and diligence in separating thorough peer review (an always ongoing process all findings are subject to), testable and observational data that has solidly passed the test of fallibility, from those where the data is either down right false, based on other non science, rightfully contestable, and easily shown fallible, in everything from their methodology, credibility of named peers… Some “Scientific Journals” publish anything anyone submits for a fee (a big red flag), whereas others make money to stay in operation, by charging for access to published information via subscriptions to libraries, collages, and others who need it or make it available, or just want to and can afford it, as charging to publish invites greed and dishonesty when the funds are not rolling in and threaten there existence.

So: checking the sources of your sources sources… is an absolute must if you want any credibility and not be exposed for the armchair researcher you obviously are!

May I suggest you cap your own freedom of speech until you truly understand what you are talking about, as a courtesy to others, vet your sources, none of which you presented are to be trusted or bias neutral: If most people did just that, there would be little legitimate reasons to even call for justifiable censorship. You yourself did allude to “Opinion” which in your case you were projecting (Psychological meaning) in accusing me of bringing to the table, and I never said it to be anything else in the first place, but Ill take well educated, epistemological sound and logically rational opinion over cognitively biased and agenda driven research any day, and can easily recognize and separate the two.

Good day sir, I have no more time for this, YOU are ultimately responsible for what you say and do and the consequences of your actions.

I was referring to ISP/net neutrality only. That is really not that hard. Making more regulations does not make it more easy to get into business.

As far as YouTube, there are plenty of alternatives, but takes time to grow. The problem is people tend to stick where the crowds are.

What are you talking about??

I responded directly to your statement below contradicting your statement, and name calling, , and you start on about something else

Have you ever seen Babylon 5 or Deep Space 9? They’re shows about how people from all over the galaxy can come together under one roof and get along however imperfect that may be.

3 Likes

Love those shows Especially deep space nine .

2 Likes

Understood. I just hate to see the internet ruining by allowing ISPs to cater to, or show favor to, business that pay for preferred treatment in terms of bandwidth.

The greed of marketing data and the huge invasions of privacy has done, IMHO, almost enough to ruin the experience of most online sites. I just hate to see it get worse.

The internet should be free, open, and equal bandwidth for everyone. Otherwise, would could potentially repeat history with the likes of AOL, CompuServe, Prodigy, et al.

Who hasn’t? Too bad they are just a series of TV shows, and far removed from our current reality. I too am hip to the Idea that we should all get along, but as it stands we are a lot closer to resembling “Ideocracy” (a must watch), and may never reach the enlightened age as depicted in the culture of the united federation of planets, without a thorough understanding of gene function… and the implementation of selective breeding of humans to get there, which just may be the only possible solution to prevent self annihilation due to celebrated and rewarded stupidity, and altruism gone way too far at the detriment of society.

And to stick to the actual topic of this thread:

Joe Biden and co, have also introduced legislation for much stronger consumer rights, and enforcement of the ones already law that have all but gone unenforced through the last 4 administrations, in favor of corporate greed, lobbying capital cronyism, and of course political contributions… If I am correct the bill discussed here may be part of the same package, which aims to insure growth of the “ecomony” (an Idiocracy pun) that calls for right to repair and a whole lot more in favor of small businesses like mine, and strongly opposes business practices to snuff out or rule out competition, and market and consumer control via imposed requirements, enforcing limits on product use, profit sharing as stipulation of contract of ownership, like having to pay the manufacturer a percentage of your profit when using “Their” product that you are the rightful and therefore also the responsible owner of, through your purchase…

Sorry no link; I got this from Louis Rossmann on YouTube. He did show the bill briefly, and only gave details as relevant to his activism on right to repair, but did provide some links. I was immersed in work, and only caught snippets of it, and now I am about to fade out. It’s been a long, but productive day. I can always look into it tomorrow, as it should get quite some coverage, and the bill will be publicly available for download (likely several hundred pages), so not for the willingly ignorant.

Good night, or good morning, day… wherever you are Ulfnic, and everyone else here. (<:

The station was called Babylon 5 because the first 3 were blown up and the 4th disappeared. It’s about perseverance over impossible odds which looks like stupidity right up until it works.

This can be the forum that sets the example for the Linux universe but not without everyone’s help so i’m depending on you to lead through example of what you think that should look like.

2 Likes

You know how they say insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?

Sounds like perseverence is just insanity with more patience.

2 Likes

LOL…perseverance is definitely not doing the same thing over and over. Funny statement, though.

3 Likes