Tucker Carlson: Should the govt regulate Google?

unknown

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
12,437
The bigger question, should government regulate any corporations in terms of their size, monopolies etc?

If, for example, theyre engaged in "suppression" or coercion of competition, shouldn't that be addressed in the courts?

He poses the question at 2:44

 
How about quit letting Google bribe govt with Lobbyists first? If you dont get rid of the Lobbyists, then it doesnt matter if its Google or whatever follows Google.
 
I completely agree with Tucker.

Google should be regulated.

We can't trust Google.

But we can trust Government, to regulate them, just fine.
 
"Companies", such as Google will just outspend individuals and small businesses in court. Perhaps, an oversight board were complains can be filed and investigated, then the offender fined and issued an administrative injunction against further violations, while if the offender contests to any degree the burden will shift onto them to file in court and the US will defend on behalf of the victim.
 
"Conservatives" used to be vehemently against such things. But I guess that only applied to talk radio.

Just goes to show that there are very few people who have principles. They all just want a government to work in their favor.
 
Should the government regulate a branch of the NSA? Sure.

I'm just kidding of course. A "regulated" Google would be even worse.
 
"Conservatives" used to be vehemently against such things. But I guess that only applied to talk radio.

Just goes to show that there are very few people who have principles. They all just want a government to work in their favor.

Hm. Well, you know, when government sets up a corporation to hide the fact that it's government, so the Constitution doesn't apply to it, then passes itself laws which prevent the people from competing with its corporation and prevents the laws which apply to other companies from applying to it, some would consider those who approve of this to be 'conservatives'.

But we all know those people are actually fascists. And not the kind that AntiFa sees behind every rock and tree, either, but actual, true fascists.

The irony here isn't that conservatives--without the quotation marks--could disapprove of Google, it's that Tucker Carlson could think the answer is more of the same government that created Google.
 
Last edited:
Hm. Well, you know, when government sets up a corporation to hide the fact that it's government, so the Constitution doesn't apply to it, then passes itself laws which prevent the people from competing with its corporation and prevents the laws which apply to other companies from applying to it, some would consider those who approve of this to be 'conservatives'.

But we all know those people are actually fascists. And not the kind that AntiFa sees behind every rock and tree, either, but actual, true fascists.

The irony here isn't that conservatives--without the quotation marks--could disapprove of Google, it's that Tucker Carlson could think the answer is more of the same government that created Google.

How do you get on on this gravy train? What college should I send my kid to?:cool:
 
Last edited:
Peer to peer.

I don't expect to ever hear Tucker/Fox entertain any thought of peer to peer solutions, or competition.
Peer to peer terrorist activity, fear mongering, and more government? Sure, always lots of that crap.

Tucker's Thoughts: Google fired James Damore just because he expressed his alternate views on their diversity philosophy and practice. We once trusted Google not to be evil. But it can't be trusted to not distort the free flow of info #Tucker

:rolleyes:
F off Tucker. Using fear, outrage and ignorance to get the boiling frogs begging for more heat.

What are YOU doing to promote peer to peer, liberty solutions?
 
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to bunklocoempire again.

Peer to peer.
I don't expect to ever hear Tucker/Fox entertain any thought of peer to peer solutions, or competition.

What are YOU doing to promote peer to peer, liberty solutions?

What is WebTorrent?

WebTorrent is the first torrent client that works in the browser. YEP, THAT'S RIGHT. THE BROWSER.

It's written completely in JavaScript – the language of the web – and uses WebRTC for true peer-to-peer transport. No browser plugin, extension, or installation is required.

Using open web standards, WebTorrent connects website users together to form a distributed, decentralized browser-to-browser network for efficient file transfer.
Why is this cool?

Imagine a video site like YouTube, where visitors help to host the site's content. The more people that use a WebTorrent-powered website, the faster and more resilient it becomes.

Browser-to-browser communication cuts out the middle-man and lets people communicate on their own terms. No more client/server – just a network of peers, all equal. WebTorrent is the first step in the journey to redecentralize the Web.

The way we code the Web will determine the way we live online. So we need to bake our values into our code. Freedom of expression needs to be baked into our code. Privacy should be baked into our code. Universal access to all knowledge. But right now, those values are not embedded in the Web.

— Brewster Kahle, Founder of the Internet Archive (from Locking the Web Open)


---------

Free Speech Social Network ‘Gab’ Threatened with Termination from Domain Provider
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/...-gab-threatened-5-days-change-domain-service/


GabBanned-640x480.jpg


In an email, Asia Registry, an Australian company,
claimed that the social network violated their “Abuse Policy” and “Australian federal and state anti-discrimination laws,
which prohibit public vilification on the basis of race, religion, or ethnic origin.”

“This action from Asia Registry, just days after our lawsuit with Google was filed, is unprecedented.
We have acted in good faith with Asia Registry and had no problems
up until
we raised our funding round
and
launched our lawsuit against Google,” he concluded.

“This exemplifies the need for a decentralized domain registrar solution.
ICANN being handed off to the EU was the most devastating blow to the free and open internet of our generation.
The Obama Administration and our Congress should be ashamed.
This should be a big wakeup call for engineers to start building pro-free speech alternative technology infrastructure solutions.”

In August, domain service GoDaddy gave neo-Nazi site The Daily Stormer 24 hours to move to a different provider,
prompting them to briefly move to Google,
where the company then seized the website’s domain.


The website was also suspended from Cloudflare,
a company that refused to crackdown on ISIS sites in 2015
over censorship concerns,
forcing The Daily Stormer to move to the dark web.

In a statement, Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince claimed,
“I woke up in a bad mood and decided someone shouldn’t be allowed on the internet,” admitting,”No one should have that power.”

Following the incident, both former Breitbart Senior Editor Milo Yiannopoulos and the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) condemned the censorship.
 
Last edited:
If I understand the Webtorrent concept correctly...
imagine sites like a 'peoples' Search Engine that 'crawls the data cloud'
powered by networked-browsers and not (corporate owned) servers.
(Do I have this right?) :confused:

That's how I understand it.

A copy of the info that I am searching for can be right next door, yet my info request has to go to the mainland to a central, resource-hogging server, and back again with the info requested, just to retrieve something I could've retrieved from next door? Ludicrous.

As a computer noob, WebTorrent is exactly how I thought the internet worked when I started going online in the 90's.
Boy was I wrong. I sure am glad WebTorrent and the concept of freedom that comes with it is available today.

I find it telling that Google is all down for alternative energy to power itself, but a peer to peer alternative to move away from resource hogging central servers? -not so much. Not that I've found, anyway.
 
How about quit letting Google bribe govt with Lobbyists first? If you dont get rid of the Lobbyists, then it doesnt matter if its Google or whatever follows Google.

So we should disregard the constitutional privlege of being able to petition the government? That seems like a cure worse than the symptoms.
 
no- we need to encourage them to change their ways by using competition or stop using their service.

 
So we should disregard the constitutional privlege of being able to petition the government? That seems like a cure worse than the symptoms.

People should have Rights, not Corporations. Google is not acting like a person. And really, Google should be adhering itself to the Constitution, not manipulating lawmakers to bypass and circumvent existing protections so it can make more money at our expense.

Just my two cents.
 
People should have Rights, not Corporations. Google is not acting like a person. And really, Google should be adhering itself to the Constitution, not manipulating lawmakers to bypass and circumvent existing protections so it can make more money at our expense.

Just my two cents.

Corporations are groups of people, they have just as many rights as the people in the group.
 
Back
Top