this post was submitted on 17 Jan 2025
2 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

77096 readers
2838 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Foni@lemm.ee 2 points 11 months ago (3 children)

In other words, a company, acting on behalf of its own shareholders, tells a government, which represents 100% of the citizens in a given territory, to shove its legislation where the sun doesn’t shine. And not only is this not inherently absurd, but it also stands a significant chance of succeeding in getting the government to comply.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] yggstyle@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They probably wouldn't have had to if the school system hadn't dropped language arts from most curriculums ages ago. Students now are getting a markedly shitter education and don't even know they're being fucked over.

[–] Letme@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's by design, the politicians only need 28% to win, easier to scrape those votes off the bottom of the barrel of knowledge

[–] yggstyle@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What really stings is watching groups and communities which historically have been supportive of each other getting fragmented by overt social media operations. It's asinine and just makes it easier to marginalize and oppress the people that most frequently need a voice.

[–] Letme@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Our country is now run by Twitter and Truth Social, and too many people are already lost to social media disinformation campaigns (counter-intelligence)

[–] Bogasse@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It felt miraculous for me that, for a while, tech companies appeared to comply to regulation (doing the bare minimum, as slowly as possible, but it kinda worked).

My hypothesis is that they now except political support from Trump administration and to pressure the EU?

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

My hypothesis is that they now except political support from Trump administration and to pressure the EU?

Yes. We will now export our fascism, making it essentially just the same imperialism we've been engaged in forever.

[–] Bogasse@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

To be fair, you haven't invented fascism.

Although, in France we have a sort of proverb that says that what happens in the US happens here 10 years later. I hope we will manage to dodge what's coming at us, this time...

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

A government ... only in theory does. Like a church represents God, because humans are too dumb to understand him directly.

"Fact-checking" is preserving a certain model of censorship and propaganda. "No fact-checking" is moving to a new model of censorship and propaganda.

Both sides of this fight prefer it being called such, so that one seems against misinformation, and the other seems against censorship, but they are not really different in this dimension. They are different in strategy and structure and interests, but neither is good for the average person.

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

“Fact-checking” is preserving a certain model of censorship and propaganda. “No fact-checking” is moving to a new model of censorship and propaganda.

Dude, facts are facts or they are not. There is no rejection of fact checking that will result in more truths being exposed to the world, only less.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

You give authority to define "facts" to a fact checking institution. That institution may not be sufficiently independent. Because of meddling the institution spreads lies under the claim they would be facts and declares actual facts as lies.

Just think about a fact checking under the authority of Trump, Musk, Zuckerberg, AIPAC...

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

this is mostly an american take, and most of the rest of the world tends to disagree with this “free speech absolutism”

it’s the slippery slope fallacy

[–] octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

That's a solvable problem, not a reason to reject fact checking as a concept.

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This is definitely to avoid the ire of fuhrer trump. It's also coincidence that meta is abandoning fact checking right before the new administration

He will sic the dogs of regulation on them if they don't dance to his tune

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 11 months ago

wish the eu would just actually ban american companies there is really no need for them anyway

[–] timestatic@feddit.org 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Fine the heck out of them then. If they don't pay the fine ban em. Plenty of alternatives out there. More competition in the search engine market would be better anyways.

Not too big of a fan of banning companies as the hurdles should be decently high... Especially if many people rely on their service but if they won't comply with our jurisdiction long term I see this as the only option as fees can not be order of business to pay

[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Start criminal proceedings to imprison the leadership responsible for non-compliance. Seize their assets to pay for any fine.

Why do we accept that all solutions to corporate crimes should be fines and kiddie gloves?

[–] MaxPow3r11@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Damn.

Wish the rest of us could just ignore all laws & not face any consequences.

What a fucking joke this entire system is.

[–] OhVenus_Baby@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They don't have a problem giving someone 100 years for a quarter bag of weed though. For a first time offense.

[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 1 points 11 months ago

Oh that was long ago. it's for not having a baby if you're female now. Megacorps run usa and now the worst (which is best for some reason) ceo in the history of man will again be president and continue the clear path to government dismantling

[–] Free_Opinions@feddit.uk 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Who decides what the facts are?

[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] Saleh@feddit.org 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Who decides what reality is?

[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago
[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I’m OK with this risk. The incredible rise of stupid arguments that we attempt to treat as equal for consideration is unreasonable. If we want to continue having meaningful discourse, we have to remove disinformation.

[–] Free_Opinions@feddit.uk 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Yeah, but the question was; who decides what is disinformation? If it was some truly competent and unbiased AI system then I perhaps wouldn't be as concerned about it, though I can see issues with that too, but humans are flawed and I see this as a potenttial slippery slope towards tyranny and censorship.

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Imperfect need not be the enemy of good. Failure to combat disinformation is absolutely a path to tyranny, and a lie going halfway around the world before the truth gets its boots on is effectively censorship if the truth comes out only by the time the public has lost interest.

Yes, there are problems combating it, but we have to show up to the fight somehow. I’ll take a fallible fact checking system over none at all, because the court of public opinion makes a poor fact checker.

[–] xenomor@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Given that we are going full authoritarian fascist now, perhaps the EU should ban Google, given the US tik tok precedent.

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What a twist. In the 90s, the internet forced countries to wake up to the new modern era. It was a combination of American companies wanting both to expand and provide goodwill.

And now, this new era is going to tell American companies to fuck off.

[–] Toribor@corndog.social 1 points 11 months ago

Democracies around the world rightly shouldn't tolerate the blatant corruption and manipulative business practice of American tech companies.

[–] AceSLS@ani.social 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Good, hope they get banned in the EU so people will switch to competitors

[–] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I could see the EU backing down a few years ago, but these days they have watered down any actual advantage in search by filling their results with ads and low quality content. Not that I use Reddit any more, but a good Reddit search engine would probably be better for a lot of use cases.

[–] timestatic@feddit.org 1 points 11 months ago

Reddit search engine? Hell nah I want more federated communities. Reddit has a contract with google anyways that blocks out foreign web crawlers.

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

That's pretty bold for a really fucking useless search engine. The EU could just block it and redirect google.com to a gov run searxng instange and everyone in europe would be better off overniggt

[–] thbb@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

The eu doesn't it to block the search engine from the internet. It only needs to block the google cash-flow from inside EU to Ireland and then it's shareholders.

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

The government, running a service that doesn't suck? Call me when it happens

[–] Letme@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You have become normalized to a country that allows a convicted felon to be president

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

As well as a political party that actively tries to make public services shitty so people won't miss it when it's dismantled.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I live in the nordics, would you like a list?

[–] timestatic@feddit.org 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

List a country with a decent population of like at least 50 mio people that competes with companies successfully and fairly. Countries with a smaller population don't have as much of a bureaucratic overhead. But even there... where do they offer a better service in a fair competition with companies

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 1 points 11 months ago

Google neither competes fairly nor provides a good service. We have to endure them because they have made investment in a competitor uneconomical.

[–] njordomir@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I would argue that "bureaucratic overhead" is missing in companies at least as much as it is excess in governments. These double checks and regulations help guard against things like companies externalizing environmental and health impacts. They also act as a check on tendencies towards consolidation (or rather should). Consequently, companies appear to operate more efficiently, but we will have to pay to clean up and handle their externalities eventually.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Google has told the EU that it will not comply with a forthcoming fact-checking law.

Perfect time to implement sky-high fines for non-compliance.

[–] ours@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ah, but that's why US Big Tech is splooshing cash all over President Felon and hoping he saves them from evil communist European consumer protections.

[–] CitizenKong@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Yep, they're hoping Trump will pressure the EU to get rid of their pesky consumer protections. They don't even make any profits for billionaires!

[–] cyd@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Google has behind it an incoming US government that puts US economic interests first, and relishes bullying its allies. The EU is weak, divided, and geostrategically boxed in. It will bend the knee.

[–] drspod@lemmy.ml 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The EU is weak, divided, and geostrategically boxed in

lol ok

[–] slaacaa@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Have you ever looked at a map? America can just float anywhere