A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Trollfest: At last the trustbusters get off their fat asses toinvestigate the Google competition killer



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 12th 19, 11:12 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Andre Jute[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,323
Default Trollfest: At last the trustbusters get off their fat asses toinvestigate the Google competition killer

On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 6:49:37 PM UTC+1, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, 12 September 2019 10:12:20 UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, September 11, 2019 at 11:08:39 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
On Wednesday, September 11, 2019 at 8:44:20 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 5:50:44 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/10/2019 5:14 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 10:30:54 PM UTC+1, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 12:25:40 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/10/2019 12:13 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 5:19:41 PM UTC+1, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 7:56:05 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
On Tuesday, September 10, 2019 at 2:35:36 AM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
On 9/9/2019 5:06 PM, Andre Jute wrote:
I've long said that Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft and several other "tech" firms should be investigated, and when found guilty punished and broken up, for trading and acquisitions practices that strangle competition and transgressing fairness and decency. Microsoft had a small turn under the microscope a couple of decades ago but it was hardly a serious effort. Now 48 state attorneys-general are investigating Google:

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/...e-into-google/

One down and many more to go.

I particularly applaud Google being investigated because their entire Board of Directors are thieves, as evidenced by their attempt only a few years ago to steal every literary copyright in the world and, in standard Ugly American Bully Mode, to tell writers that if they objected, it was up to them to write to Google and beg not to be stolen from. They're scum and I hope those 48 AG's know how to put in the boot.

A far better0 search engine, which keeps no records and thus no private information whatsoever, is Duck-Duck-Go:

https://duckduckgo.com

Andre Jute
Come back, Teddy Roosevelt. We need you!


check out the current contretemps with Dennis Praeger for
example.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Yeah. I can't imagine anyone more upstanding and careful of the proprieties than Dennis Prager. It is pretty clear that Google/YouTube are persecuting him for ideological reasons. The threadbare excuse that they're a private business and can do as they please is bull**** that Congress should straighten out. Google and YouTube use a public resource -- the airwaves, the support of the government for putting transmitting and relay towers all over the place, etc, a long, long list with which I won't bore you -- and should thus be extra-careful not to take sides. And, clearly, they've long since taken sides in the most brutal and clumsy way possible.

Google's hypocrisy and treachery is stunning. They refuse to work with the Department of Defense -- but they're happy to help the Chinese intensify the most oppressive surveillance state in the world! Do they think people are too stupid to notice? And then they pull dumb stunts like assaulting Prager, who is everyone's idea of uptight righteousness -- it's almost as if they're sending a message: We, Google and YouTube, are too stupid not to cross eight lanes of speeding traffic to pick a nickel off the pavement on the other side, so please come hit us.

How do you suppose that the US federal government can regulate speech on the internet after Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union? Compelling Google, YouTube or anyone else to host Denis Praeger is a clear First Amendment violation. Do you want the nanny state to run the internet? More government regulation of expression? Perhaps we should send you in conservative re-education camp.

Anti-competitive behavior or misappropriation of copyright is a whole other thing. Continue to foam about that.

-- Jay Beattie.

Who's talking about the government regulating speech? Not me.. Only you, Jay, and you a lawyer too! Shame on you, man.

I'm talking about the government's duty to create an environment in which free speech is given an opportunity to be free, as it clearly is not under the Google/YouTube monopoly of a public medium and its ideological censorship. There's ample precedent in trustbusting and on the other hand licensing the airwaves for television plus forbidding newspaper magnates from simultaneously holding broadcasting licenses. None of this selects the particular utterances or forms of speech permitted but it all contributes to multiple outlets which by their multiplicity promotes free speech. It is exactly the same argument for breaking up Standard Oil because it was a monopoly, or for denying Hearst a television license, in the one case to create many economic opportunities which, as my answer to John notes, doubled the value of monopoly merely by turning it into multiplicity of suppliers, and on the other preserved the multiplicity of viewpoints. Both are forms of infrastructure, well within
the
purview of government in any modern conservative view, in fact much more so than most of the stuff government involves itself in.

Andre Jute
This is all sledgehammer stuff, no subtlety required


It's not at all clear to me and likely hinges more on
administrative law, The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and
prior case law than a simple Constitutional argument.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

You may not portray as news anything that is provably false. At this point it falls under Freedom of Speech but you can and should pull ALL reporter's credentials who falsify the news just as you would jail them if they did so in a court of law.

When the White House pulled Jim Acosta's White House ticket for unprofessional behaviour, a judge made them give it back. That looked like nobody told the judge that in his temporary company house at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington DC, which comes with his job as chief executive of the nation, Donald J. Trump was king and could decide who would enter. After the Pierre threw me out because they discovered the short hairy fellow staying with me was not my little brother but bonobo, a sort of chimpanzee, and that besides I let tarantulas sleep in my pockets, the company assigned me a house in Connecticut; there an underdressed Air France stew told one of my partners who knocked on the door, "Strip or **** off," and when his girlfriend, a stuck-up cow overly impressed with the fact that her dad was an earl, complained about this to the company chairman, he said, "It's Andre's house. If you don't like the language of his girlfriends, don't go there." Seems simple, straightforward
to me -- but apparently not to a judge.

I think that it is long past time when the media could simply lie to the American public under the guise of truth. If this requires another Amendment to the Constitution to make sure that this is totally understood by all then so be it. The Lame Stream Media has for far too long taken advantage of the American public acting for ALL the world as the same fake news purveyors that control every dictatorship in the world.

If you believe in free speech, you must also believe in the right of reporters to lie, slant, bias, distort, and generally be scum, including pink scum. I despise those clowns but I don't see how we can do anything about them, and in any event Rush Limbaugh and Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity and the Claremont Review and National Review are cutting them down to size by holding them up to ridicule. Rachel Maddow is her own worst enemy: no conservative can make her look more stupid and malevolent than she makes herself look. That applies to so many of them -- wishing in public that the President should be exposed as a Russian asset? -- that the best option, even if there were something that could be done about them, would be to let them run and ruin themselves.

Andre Jute
Patience is a winner too


Sez you.

Sadly, US case law differs from logical consistency with the
US Constitution or from common sense:

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supre...t/376/254.html

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Andrew, there is a major difference between Freedom of the Press and someone using the public airwaves to do things. I have the absolute right to have a democratic say in how these airwaves may be used. Google and the others, while STILL liable to anti-trust laws, CAN BE REGULATED in exactly the same manner that TV stations are.

We DO have a weapon to stop the EXTREME leftist tilt of the Internet.

Ads
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Chznzy and Jorg Boosh Laughing their asses off Davey Crockett[_5_] Racing 0 September 11th 09 07:47 PM
GOOGLE MONEY Earn BILLIONS through GOOGLE Without Investment addy General 0 November 24th 07 06:14 AM
RR: A tale of two asses MattB Mountain Biking 14 August 23rd 05 03:06 AM
Cyclist killer jailed, motorist killer let off. Peter B UK 0 August 20th 05 09:18 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.