Thursday, October 15, 2020

The story isn't what's alleged to be Hunter Biden's laptop.

The story is Big Tech showing us the Orwellian depths to which they are willing to descend to protect their political friends on the left.

I strongly suspect the laptop data is garbage--my faith in Rudy Giuliani's reliability cannot be detected with the most sensitive of instruments.

But watching our Silicon Valley overlords straight-up censor entire newspapers and lock out the Press Secretary?

That's a promise of things to come.

Just imagine what they'd be willing to do to ordinary people.

Applying antitrust to these entities is long overdue.

 

13 comments:

  1. So suddenly you think that private companies should be regulated? Tech companies aren’t public utilities and conservatives have been vilifying the idea that corporations owe any duty to the public at all since the 1970s, until now, when it hurts you.

    The entire conservative project is a pack of lies designed to entrench wealthy white males in power and make the rest of us miserable. It gives me nothing but pleasure to see you suffer from your own system.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow, you are very angry with white people.)...please pray for me so that I could better understand where your pain comes from. Can you describe your relationship with your father?

      Delete
    2. Karen is a lawyer who is capable of making careful distinctions--until she lets her political ragebot take the wheel.

      Then she starts belching out things like this. Last time it was all Catholics are trumpers, now she's doing the female white ally intersectional thing.

      She cruises Big Pulpit for stories to rage about, clicks, vomits out a tweet-level-imagined-burn and runs off. I guess it's therapeutic?

      Whatever you do, don't take it personally.

      Delete
    3. Way to prove the old saying, Karen:
      "Conservatives understand liberals by listening to what liberals are saying. Liberals understand conservatives by listening to what liberals are saying."

      Delete
  2. There is a bit of irony in making such a claim from a free Google account. Setting that aside, democracy does not much rest on major corporations being fair and unbiased; it depends much, MUCH more on citizens having the sense to remain skeptical of what they read on Facebook or Twitter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That really doesn't apply to the problem here. Skepticism should be the order of the day, yes.

      But the problem here is Facebook and Twitter determining telling people that they can't speak and preventing others from reading something. In other words, censorship. A different--and more sinister--problem entirely.

      Delete
    2. Well, I doubt General Mills would let me post messages on the back of their cereal boxes, either. Democracy is in just as much trouble if people are getting their "news" from Facebook and Twitter as if they are reading it off the backs of cereal boxes.

      Delete
    3. "If you don't like it, build your own global search engine!"

      Global search depends on internet providers...

      "If you don't like it, build your own global internet!"

      We should talk about what 'natural monopoly' means sometime...

      Say I take this on. How do I get paid when the Woke payment processors freeze me out?

      "If you don't like it, build your own payment processing system!"

      Which has to be recognized by the banks that people use, so...

      "If you don't like it, build your own global financial system!"

      Sigh... This is why we can't have nice thigns.

      Delete
    4. Howard that's exactly what's at debate. General Mills "publishes" their cereal boxes - so they control the content AND are responsible for it. If something illegal were to be posted on the back of a cheerios box, they would be arrested or sued for it.

      A service company, cannot be sued or prosecuted for what their product was used for. Thus if some people planned a terrorist attack via phones, AT&T couldn't be prosecuted.

      What's at issue is that the tech companies want all the perks of being publishers, while enjoying the responsibilities of providers. They need to pick one or the other. If they want to curate content and control who's online, then they assume responsibility for what appears and can be sued/prosecuted for what's posted to their platform. If they want to avoid that fate, then they can't be banning someone just for posting "learn to code."

      Delete
    5. The New York Post is still locked out of Twitter today.

      Chinese propaganda is unimpeded.

      The Biden Administration is going to be able to outsource censorship to Big Tech. Sotto voce, of course. But no less effective for all that.

      https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2020/10/22/twitter-status-report-ny-post-still-locked-chinas-blue-checked-propagandist-still-tweeting/

      Delete
  3. The Tech Lords were given a sweet deal by Congress in the dawn of the tech era on the mistaken belief that they would be neutral platforms. They are not. Want to play the political game? Suffer the political consequences.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "I strongly suspect the laptop data is garbage--my faith in Rudy Giuliani's reliability cannot be detected with the most sensitive of instruments."

    How is that information useful to us?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't speak to all of you, but the answer would seem to be "not useful at all."

      To my stunned amazement, the laptop appears to be the real deal.

      Delete

Be reasonably civil. Ire alloyed with reason is fine. But slagging the host gets you the banhammer.

The Secret to Thriving during the Eastern Great Lent.

A couple secrets, actually. The first is Lebanese and Syrian cooking. At our new Melkite parish, the Divine Liturgy has been followed by Len...