Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday October 14 2017, @12:34PM   Printer-friendly
from the follow-the-money dept.

[...] tech companies are under fire for creating problems instead of solving them. At the top of the list is Russian interference in last year's presidential election. Social media might have originally promised liberation, but it proved an even more useful tool for stoking anger. The manipulation was so efficient and so lacking in transparency that the companies themselves barely noticed it was happening.

The election is far from the only area of concern. Tech companies have accrued a tremendous amount of power and influence. Amazon determines how people shop, Google how they acquire knowledge, Facebook how they communicate. All of them are making decisions about who gets a digital megaphone and who should be unplugged from the web.

Their amount of concentrated authority resembles the divine right of kings, and is sparking a backlash that is still gathering force.

Is it that the tech companies are creating problems for society as a whole, or merely disrupting the status quo for the old Powers-That-Be?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 14 2017, @06:06PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 14 2017, @06:06PM (#582354)

    It is easy to say 'dont be evil' when you are the underdog.

    But once you are on top you need to stop and think. What if my definition of 'evil' is wrong?

    Saying you like Hillary or Trump does not seem particularly evil to me.

    "Russians"/"Nazis" is just a way for people to sooth over their feelings that their team lost (go team D! or is that R?). They spent a whole year with 'she has it in the bag' to not winning is quite the ego blow. Russians means they were not wrong with who was the 'popular' one and they are still right. That she did not run a crummy campaign of 'dont vote for him' with little other substance. She got a lot of 'her I guuuuuess'. I have voted for that sort before and will again. They were shocked by the 'silent majority'. Well with the way they have acted since last November they should not be. There are three things you do not bring up in polite company. Politics, religion, and money. Can not even talk about the weather these days as people have decided to move it into the politics category.

  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday October 14 2017, @07:20PM (1 child)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday October 14 2017, @07:20PM (#582380)

    Your definition of "not evil" is somebody else's definition of "positively evil." It's inherent in any competitive society, which the free market strives to be.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 14 2017, @08:05PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 14 2017, @08:05PM (#582393)

      Exactly my point. If you pick 'dont be evil' you may need to rethink that. As there will be those who think what YOU do, is...

      H v T was more along the lines of Coke v Pepsi. But stating my like for one over the other is not terrible good but not terribly evil ether. To treat it as your line in the sand is silly and foolhardy and alienates people.

      It strikes me of a quote from the movie Hoffa. "If a guy's close to you, you can't slight 'im. You can't slight that guy. A real grievance can be resolved; differences can be resolved. But an imaginary hurt, a slight - that motherfucker gonna hate you 'til the day he dies" These companies have cozied up to everyone about how wonderful they are. Then decided to get all censory and 'dont be evil' on people but with their 'interesting' definition of it. They have made bitter enemy's of the very people that used to love them.