CNBC: Zuckerberg backs stronger Internet privacy and election laws: 'We need a more active role for governments'
CNBC: Zuckerberg backs stronger Internet privacy and election laws: 'We need a more active role for governments'. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/30/mark-zuckerberg-calls-for-tighter-internet-r...
It's the natural reaction of all monopolists in the market they dominate. It protects their position. On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 10:08 AM jim bell <jdb10987@yahoo.com> wrote:
CNBC: Zuckerberg backs stronger Internet privacy and election laws: 'We need a more active role for governments'. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/30/mark-zuckerberg-calls-for-tighter-internet-r...
On 3/31/19 1:08 PM, jim bell wrote:
CNBC: Zuckerberg backs stronger Internet privacy and election laws: 'We need a more active role for governments'. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/30/mark-zuckerberg-calls-for-tighter-internet-r...
So the richest man in the world wants three things: Stronger internet privacy laws: Zucking Fuckerberg does not like competition in the consumer surveillance market. Stronger election laws: Less voters - through a process biased to let typical consumers in, screen everyone else out. A more active role for governments: Expand NatSec/LEA surveillance 'partnerships' with service providers, shift the costs of censorship from the private to the public sector.
On Sun, Mar 31, 2019 at 05:37:25PM -0400, Steve Kinney wrote:
On 3/31/19 1:08 PM, jim bell wrote:
CNBC: Zuckerberg backs stronger Internet privacy and election laws: 'We need a more active role for governments'. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/30/mark-zuckerberg-calls-for-tighter-internet-r...
So the richest man in the world wants three things:
Stronger internet privacy laws: Zucking Fuckerberg does not like competition in the consumer surveillance market.
Stronger election laws: Less voters - through a process biased to let typical consumers in, screen everyone else out.
A more active role for governments: Expand NatSec/LEA surveillance 'partnerships' with service providers, shift the costs of censorship from the private to the public sector.
And shift the "liability" for "privacy" and "data protection" to the private sector, so the government is exonerated of its duty of care (in context of having a government), and private sector is exonerated for all its activities with monopoly and liablity absolving legislation in its permanent favour.
participants (4)
-
jim bell -
Kurt Buff - GSEC, GCIH -
Steve Kinney -
Zenaan Harkness