Connect with us

Tech

‘Free Market’ Libertarians Miss The Mark Completely on Regulating Big Tech

Just because Mark Zuckerberg is calling for a bad proposal to regulate Big Tech does not mean that all proposals should be rejected.

Published

on

Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook, released an op/ed on Saturday where he called for Big Brother to regulate his competition out of commission while putting new Draconian restrictions into place that would shift the blame off of him for committing an Orwellian assault against free speech on his corporate platform.

“The rules governing the Internet allowed a generation of entrepreneurs to build services that changed the world and created a lot of value in people’s lives. It’s time to update these rules to define clear responsibilities for people, companies and governments going forward,” the Facebook founder wrote about his restrictive proposal to strange the free internet.

“Lawmakers often tell me we have too much power over speech, and frankly I agree. I’ve come to believe that we shouldn’t make so many important decisions about speech on our own. So we’re creating an independent body so people can appeal our decisions. We’re also working with governments, including French officials, on ensuring the effectiveness of content review systems,” Zuckerberg added, making it clear that he is happy to cede unprecedented power to big government if it will clear up his public relations problem.

Trending: LEAKED AUDIO: Joe Biden Laughs with Former Ukrainian President about Sabotaging Trump’s Campaign in 2016

Some “free market” commentators, like the leather jacket-clad Nick Gillespie of the Koch-funded Reason Magazine, are already throwing in the towel. An avid proponent of laissez-faire economics, Gillespie sees the monolithic corporations embracing this regulatory push and is rolling over since his dogma claims there is nothing we can do to stop these so-called market forces.

take our poll - story continues below

RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“Goodbye to hive minds, the wisdom of crowds, and the disintermediation that allow each of us to decide what is ‘terrorist propaganda, hate speech and more.’ We’re back in bad old meatspace, with ‘independent bodies’ and expert committees and all that,” Gillespie wrote, bemoaning Zuckerberg’s push for more regulation.

“Goodbye, open internet; you will be missed,” Gillespie wrote in a final submissive whimper to Big Brother.

However, all hope is far from being lost. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) can be amended to revoke certain special government immunity privileges for tech companies if they act as partisan political publishers rather than neutral content providers.

The key provision of the CDA reads: “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”

Freshman US Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) is leading the charge against Big Tech for Orwellian censorship policies against conservative free speech as well as other hostile business practices:

Handicapped by a mediocre ideology, the Koch-suckers at Reason Magazine cannot fathom anything but total obsequence to their corporate masters, but there is a non-invasive solution: Changing Section 230 of the CDA. If tech corporations refuse to uphold basic American values like freedom of speech, they should not be give any special government favors protecting them from liability and competition.

Tech

Twitter Posts Job Posting for Developing Paid Subscription Service; Will Platform Become Pay-to-Use?

Will it lead to the downfall of the platform?

Published

on

Shares for Twitter’s stock surged more than 8% on Wednesday as the company posted an online job listing for a developer who would work on a new system designed as a pay-to-use platform.

The job listing advertises the opening for a project team termed “Gryphon.” The company describes the team as creating a “subscription platform” that “can be reused by other teams in the future.”

In a statement to CNN on the job listing, Twitter underplayed the announcement, stating that it was only a job listing, not a product announcement.

We’re conducting this survey to assess the interest in a new, more enhanced version of Tweetdeck. We regularly conduct user research to gather feedback about people’s Twitter experience and to better inform our product investment decisions, and we’re exploring several ways to make Tweetdeck even more valuable for professionals.

take our poll - story continues below

RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • RIOTS: Who do you blame for the violence on America's streets?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

CEO Jack Dorsey has resisted shareholder demands to reorganize Twitter to prioritize profitability, most recently fending off a buyout attempt staged by oligarch Paul Singer challenging his leadership of the company. Dorsey kept his position of power over the company after reaching an agreement with profit-hungry shareholders, and the new development of paid subscription software could signal he intends to further satisfy them.

The company’s major investors will likely be pleased by any sign the company intends to convert its service into a pay-to-use model, evolving away from the tradition business model of micro-targeted ads towards its user base. However, a change to a subscription model could prove to be a threat to Twitter’s appeal, especially when newer free speech platforms are gunning for the platform’s user base and the company caves to the demands of censorious liberal journalists in suspending a variety of public figures deemed inconvenient to the neoliberal societal model.

Ultimately, the greed and thirst for power of the privileged elites of Silicon Valley could possibly bring about an end to their era of domination over online political speech, heralding a renaissance of the internet.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending