Net Nuetrality

A Place to respectfully discuss those topics that you should never discuss.
post

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Buc2 » Tue Aug 07, 2018 10:56 am

Image

Senate Democrats Are Circulating Plans for Government Takeover of the Internet: Reason Roundup
Plus: Testing telemedicine abortion and 3D printed guns.
Elizabeth Nolan Brown|Jul. 31, 2018 9:30 am
Douglas Christian/ZUMA Press/Newscom

All your base are belong to us. A leaked memo circulating among Senate Democrats contains a host of bonkers authoritarian proposals for regulating digital platforms, purportedly as a way to get tough on Russian bots and fake news. To save American trust in "our institutions, democracy, free press, and markets," it suggests, we need unprecedented and undemocratic government intervention into online press and markets, including "comprehensive (GDPR-like) data protection legislation" of the sort enacted in the E.U.

Titled "Potential Policy Proposals for Regulation of Social Media and Technology Firms," the draft policy paper—penned by Sen. Mark Warner and leaked by an unknown source to Axios—the paper starts out by noting that Russians have long spread disinformation, including when "the Soviets tried to spread 'fake news' denigrating Martin Luther King" (here he fails to mention that the Americans in charge at the time did the same). But NOW IT'S DIFFERENT, because technology.

"Today's tools seem almost built for Russian disinformation techniques," Warner opines. And the ones to come, he assures us, will be even worse.

Here's how Warner is suggesting we deal:

Mandatory location verification. The paper suggests forcing social media platforms to authenticate and disclose the geographic origin of all user accounts or posts.

Mandatory identity verification: The paper suggests forcing social media and tech platforms to authenticate user identities and only allow "authentic" accounts ("inauthentic accounts not only pose threats to our democratic process...but undermine the integrity of digital markets"), with "failure to appropriately address inauthentic account activity" punishable as "a violation of both SEC disclosure rules and/or Section 5 of the [Federal Trade Commission] Act."

Bot labeling: Warner's paper suggests forcing companies to somehow label bots or be penalized (no word from Warner on how this is remotely feasible)

Define popular tech as "essential facilities." These would be subject to all sorts of heightened rules and controls, says the paper, offering Google Maps as an example of the kinds of apps or platforms that might count. "The law would not mandate that a dominant provider offer the serve for free," writes Warner. "Rather, it would be required to offer it on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms" provided by the government.

Other proposals include more disclosure requirements for online political speech, more spending to counter supposed cybersecurity threats, more funding for the Federal Trade Commission, a requirement that companies' algorithms can be audited by the feds (and this data shared with universities and others), and a requirement of "interoperability between dominant platforms."

The paper also suggests making it a rule that tech platforms above a certain size must turn over internal data and processes to "independent public interest researchers" so they can identify potential "public health/addiction effects, anticompetitive behavior, radicalization," scams, "user propagated misinformation," and harassment—data that could be used to "inform actions by regulators or Congress."

And—of course— these include further revisions to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, recently amended by Congress to exclude protections for prostitution-related content. A revision to Section 230 could provide the ability for users to demand takedowns of certain sorts of content and hold platforms liable if they don't abide, it says, while admitting that "attempting to distinguish between true disinformation and legitimate satire could prove difficult."

"The proposals in the paper are wide ranging and in some cases even politically impossible, and raise almost as many questions as they try to answer," suggested Mathew Ingram, putting it very mildly at the Columbia Journalism Review.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 12320
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 998 times
Been thanked: 427 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Zarniwoop » Tue Aug 07, 2018 11:29 am

Reason hasn’t been right leaning in at least 3 years, more writers voted for Hillary then Trump. And about 2/3 of the writers have gone full SJW often at the expense of freedom


There’s only 3 or 4 writers on that sight that are worthwhile reading
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6945
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 375 times
Been thanked: 303 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Buc2 » Tue Aug 07, 2018 11:38 am

Zarniwoop wrote:Reason hasn’t been right leaning in at least 3 years, more writers voted for Hillary then Trump. And about 2/3 of the writers have gone full SJW often at the expense of freedom


There’s only 3 or 4 writers on that sight that are worthwhile reading

Honestly, I just assumed based on their tag line, Free Minds And Free Markets. That is the first article from that site I've ever read.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 12320
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 998 times
Been thanked: 427 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Tue Aug 07, 2018 11:39 am

Copy of this memo out there?

Nevermind. It's Mark Warner. **** him.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 14758
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 160 times
Been thanked: 673 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Zarniwoop » Tue Aug 07, 2018 11:42 am

It used to be better till the got an influx of new young writers. Many of them are incredibly far from libertarian and are lookimg for more intervention. Some are still really good. The Volokh stuff is still great for legal writings.
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 6945
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 375 times
Been thanked: 303 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Stuart » Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:21 pm

let em all censor. FB and twitter are left leaning playgrounds. I stopped using long ago.

soon they will be one big circle jerk (even more) and they'll be going into the polls saying we have 72% blah, blah........

then they'll lose because their to stupid to fathom a lot of people have stopped using and they underestimated once again.
Stuart
 
Posts: 485
Joined: Wed May 02, 2018 12:10 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Buc2 » Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:30 pm

As long as my kids are on FB, I'll be on FB.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 12320
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 998 times
Been thanked: 427 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:37 pm

I don't miss FB one bit.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 14758
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 160 times
Been thanked: 673 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Stuart » Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:44 pm

my wife can show me photo's from FB if she wants, but no, I don't miss it.

The Parkland incident was the tipping point for me. The hatred I saw spewed from people I know was the last straw.
Stuart
 
Posts: 485
Joined: Wed May 02, 2018 12:10 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Buc2 » Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:49 pm

Mountaineer Buc wrote:I don't miss FB one bit.

I don't either.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 12320
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 998 times
Been thanked: 427 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:55 pm

Buc2 wrote:As long as my kids are on FB, I'll be on FB.

Buc2 wrote:
Mountaineer Buc wrote:I don't miss FB one bit.

I don't either.
Last edited by DreadNaught on Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 13775
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 557 times
Been thanked: 598 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Buc2 » Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:55 pm

DreadNaught wrote:
Buc2 wrote:I don't either.


Buc2 wrote:As long as my kids are on FB, I'll be on FB.

Fake news.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 12320
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 998 times
Been thanked: 427 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Buc2 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 7:29 am

Apparently, Facebook censors can't distinguish parody from real fake news.

Image

Disclaimer: I cannot attest to the authenticity of the above meme.
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 12320
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 998 times
Been thanked: 427 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby bucfanclw » Wed Aug 08, 2018 7:49 am

Buc2 wrote:Apparently, Facebook censors can't distinguish parody from real fake news.

Image

Disclaimer: I cannot attest to the authenticity of the above meme.

It happened a little while back and Facebook issued a public apology for the error.
User avatar
bucfanclw
 
Posts: 4070
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:09 pm
Location: I'm told Clewiston
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 164 times

Re: Net Nuetrality

Postby Buc2 » Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:22 am

bucfanclw wrote:
Buc2 wrote:Apparently, Facebook censors can't distinguish parody from real fake news.

Image

Disclaimer: I cannot attest to the authenticity of the above meme.

It happened a little while back and Facebook issued a public apology for the error.


Awesome! Thanks for following that up.

Edit: Here's the story on the apology...
http://thefederalist.com/2018/03/02/fac ... bylon-bee/
Image
Don't tread on me
User avatar
Buc2
 
Posts: 12320
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:16 pm
Location: America
Has thanked: 998 times
Been thanked: 427 times

Previous

post

Return to Politics and Religion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot], Ken Carson, PanteraCanes and 15 guests