JC Political Thread - For All Things Political Part 2

[Immortality]

2 completely different scenarios. Only those walking past the shop front and bother to stop and read will see it, social media sites use algorithms that tend to push certain topics and media to users who might not actually be looking for it.

I'm sure your X feed is full of conspiracy crap or "alternative facts" as certain politicians put it.

Yea but say a person puts a poster up on a shop, then the whole town sees that poster.
You can't blame the shop owner for the whole town seeing the poster before he cleans his shop wall.
It's the person that posted said poster up that broke the law.

News papers get held accountable if they publish false stories, same with TV news or radio stations but there's no control over social media platforms. That is wrong, they should be held to the same set of standards

In your example the shop owner will probably remove the offensive poster when he's made aware where as Musk gives you the middle finger when you report a post on X and then probably retweets the post so it gets much wider visibility.

 

[shane_3800]

2 completely different scenarios. Only those walking past the shop front and bother to stop and read will see it, social media sites use algorithms that tend to push certain topics and media to users who might not actually be looking for it.

I'm sure your X feed is full of conspiracy crap or "alternative facts" as certain politicians put it.

News papers get held accountable if they publish false stories, same with TV news or radio stations but there's no control over social media platforms. That is wrong, they should be held to the same set of standards

In your example the shop owner will probably remove the offensive poster when he's made aware where as Musk gives you the middle finger when you report a post on X and then probably retweets the post so it gets much wider visibility.

I don't use Twitter formerly X.

 

[Reaper]

So an internet entity is supposed to adhere to every countries laws? That doesn't sound practical.

Actually yes. They are happy to operate in a given country with a view to gaining an income then I don't see a problem with them adhering to local laws. If they don't see value in that market then of course the tech to geofence it is not hard.

Of course there are plenty of ways to get around that with vpn's etc but for most of the population they either don't care or are incapable of such things.

It's no difference to a car maker wanting to sell to a particular market - either they make the car comply with local regs or they don't sell it. Then it becomes a question for the local law makers to balance whatever they deem necessary vs the potential of locking out potential services/items their population wants/needs.

 

[Immortality]

So an internet entity is supposed to adhere to every countries laws? That doesn't sound practical.

Sorry, missed this.

Why not?

Why should a few ultra rich people run rough shot over sovereign national countries?

Wanting kids to attend school makes you Hitler?

It's not what, it's how and it's how this new government is going about things.

 

[Immortality]

I don't use Twitter formerly X.

Surprising. Neither do I

 

[vc commodore]

Someone’s being cagey.

Na, I suspect, someone doesn't comprehend the question, or can't find the answer on youtube

 

[hademall]

Someone’s being cagey.

FFS! I don't know why you guys don't just ask him. “Shane, please put these nosey feckers out of their misery and tell them whether you stood before the beak in a criminal trial!

 

[shane_3800]

FFS! I don't know why you guys don't just ask him. “Shane, please put these nosey feckers out of their misery and tell them whether you stood before the beak in a criminal trial!

The stupid thing is that I shouldn't need to, I said I have a DUI, that is dealt with in criminal court.

 

[keith reed]

The stupid thing is that I shouldn't need to, I said I have a DUI, that is dealt with in criminal court.

Zero interest for me. When your business becomes mine I will be a changed person.

 

[shane_3800]

Actually yes. They are happy to operate in a given country with a view to gaining an income then I don't see a problem with them adhering to local laws. If they don't see value in that market then of course the tech to geofence it is not hard.

Of course there are plenty of ways to get around that with vpn's etc but for most of the population they either don't care or are incapable of such things.

It's no difference to a car maker wanting to sell to a particular market - either they make the car comply with local regs or they don't sell it. Then it becomes a question for the local law makers to balance whatever they deem necessary vs the potential of locking out potential services/items their population wants/needs.

Well it's not that simple though.
Say a company wants to advertise on X, well if X is based in the US and the advertiser is based in Ireland, now lets say the advertiser transfers that money from Ireland to the US, but the advertising is aimed globally or in the western countries. How would that have anything to do with Australia, apart from end users seeing the add on their computers.
There was no money or operations taken on Australian land, so Australian law shouldn't have any reach on these matters.

I think that the tech companies know that they have the upper hand against Australia, which is why they keep on operating.
Can you imagine the Australian government locking out Facebook, YT, X and Instagram ect, gee they're having enough backlash over tiktok, it would spell their death warrant at the next election.
Geo blocking works good if your name is Vlad, Xi or Kim, you don't really have to worry about voter backlash in those countries.