The World May Be Headed For a Fragmented "Splinternet"

J3RK said:
I'd actually love to see what would happen if a company like Facebook or Google just shut off their services in a country that's complaining about them (like Germany). Might not have even mattered a few years ago, but now, there'd be outright panic probably.
Click to expand...

I've been thinking over this part of your comment since you made it. I think you're wrong . I think what would happen, is that the EU (or any other region) would simply stop the service from doing business there at all and a home grown would come up to take it's place. This happens in other markets... Google in Chine, Facebook in Russia - easily replaced in the blink of an eye.

These companies aren't the solid monopolies you may think. Their tech is easy to replicate, their absence would give it a reason to happen.

And possibly it should. For the majority of us, the US legal system is irrelevant and having those concepts pushed out on the rest of the world for so long is going get a push back. It's happening and it's going to continue to happen. The internet is suppose3d to be a layer, just a tool. What you build with it should support your culture, heritage and spending patterns (business).

Anyhow, I won't sit here and pretend I have all the answers, but the only panic there would be is the stock drop in the US.
 
The alternative is a mass exodus to the dark net; some open-source, unregulated not-Google. Decentralization is a nightmare for government regulation; you can't sue the world.
 
Ur_Mom said:
First off, I only read a little bit of that article.

Fuck that. Don't like it, censor it at the ISP level in your country.
Click to expand...
No, fuck that, don't censor it anywhere. Any government that tries to censor anything should die in a fiery revolution.
 
M76 said:
No, fuck that, don't censor it anywhere. Any government that tries to censor anything should die in a fiery revolution.
Click to expand...

Sure, I agree with that. But, I'd also think that governments allowing women to be stoned to death because she was raped to die in a fiery revolution. But... that's a topic for another thread in another subforum. ;)

It's going to happen. Their country, their rules. Just keep them in THEIR country, not others. If they tried anything with any US based site (without a physical presence in their own country), I'd hope they'd be laughed at and told to fuck off. The physical presence thing I can see, it's the price they pay to do business there. It's still not right, but they signed up there, it's their rules.
 
Ur_Mom said:
Sure, I agree with that. But, I'd also think that governments allowing women to be stoned to death because she was raped to die in a fiery revolution. But... that's a topic for another thread in another subforum. ;)

It's going to happen. Their country, their rules. Just keep them in THEIR country, not others. If they tried anything with any US based site (without a physical presence in their own country), I'd hope they'd be laughed at and told to fuck off. The physical presence thing I can see, it's the price they pay to do business there. It's still not right, but they signed up there, it's their rules.
Click to expand...
Stoning? I don't think that's covered by freedom of speech. Freedom of expressions goes only so far. Hurting someone (actually, not their feelings) is something entirely different.
 
M76 said:
Stoning? I don't think that's covered by freedom of speech. Freedom of expressions goes only so far. Hurting someone (actually, not their feelings) is something entirely different.
Click to expand...

So, stoning would be fine? But, freedom of speech worldwide is more important?
 
Simplyfun said:
I've been thinking over this part of your comment since you made it. I think you're wrong . I think what would happen, is that the EU (or any other region) would simply stop the service from doing business there at all and a home grown would come up to take it's place. This happens in other markets... Google in Chine, Facebook in Russia - easily replaced in the blink of an eye.

These companies aren't the solid monopolies you may think. Their tech is easy to replicate, their absence would give it a reason to happen.

And possibly it should. For the majority of us, the US legal system is irrelevant and having those concepts pushed out on the rest of the world for so long is going get a push back. It's happening and it's going to continue to happen. The internet is suppose3d to be a layer, just a tool. What you build with it should support your culture, heritage and spending patterns (business).

Anyhow, I won't sit here and pretend I have all the answers, but the only panic there would be is the stock drop in the US.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that wouldn't happen. However, I do think there would be some form of uproar. It's not about there being a lack of other viable solutions to this, it's about what everyone else in your circle of friends and family are using globally. Nobody in another country is going to hop on "Germa-book" just to talk to their friends and family in Germany, when they're already on Facebook.

I personally use ZERO social media (unless you count a couple of obscure internet forums like this). I have no hat, horse, hand or other object in this at all. I don't even disagree with the basis behind a policy like this, I just think the actual policy isn't the solution. Hate groups make me want to vomit, but I think if something is going to be done to regulate them, then countries/governments/law enforcement need to grow some balls and go straight after them. Not try to fine some tech company that has no affiliation that was just the medium for their speech.

As far as my comment on wanting to see the uproar or panic if a big company pulled their presence... I just think it would be funny. Like the EU against MS when they packaged internet explorer. Or Google, or now FB. So many people use those services, and nobody REALLY cares if IE comes with Windows. I don't even love any of the above companies. That said, I still think it's idiotic all of the fines the EU tries to level against some of these companies. People have a choice of whether to use or buy a product. There are alternatives out there. If people want the convenience or compatibility of an MS or Google ecosystem over an open source like Linux, then that's what they're getting into. Anyway, I'm veering off topic here, just trying to outline my only semi-serious reason behind that portion of my post.
 
SecretStash said:
The definition of hate speech will expand
Click to expand...
Exactly. That is why its was created. Because it can't be defined and can be forever twisted to mean... anything. Marxists wet dream.

There is no such thing as hate speech. There is only free speech or its bad cousin, tyranny (aka, no speech).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top