# Zuckerberg Calls for Government Regulations



## Cookie_ (Mar 30, 2019)

As the title says, Zuckerberg released an OP-ED calling for regulations and standardization of internet companies.
This could have some major implications going forward.

The internet needs new rules. Let’s start in these four areas


----------



## amlove21 (Mar 30, 2019)

I need to read that a little bit further and internalize what that means. 

But from my initial skim- that’s a huge move towards ‘utility’ and ‘regulation’ and not ‘social media without bounds’.


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 31, 2019)

Cookie_ said:


> As the title says, Zuckerberg released an OP-ED calling for regulations and standardization of internet companies.
> This could have some major implications going forward.
> 
> The internet needs new rules. Let’s start in these four areas


Lot of fluff, and FB is good shit.

He's advocating a limit on harmful speech, which translates into conservatives are bad so don't let them talk.

FB needs to be treated like a utility.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Mar 31, 2019)

Does Facebook need regulating?  Same with Twitter?  If they're going to let those of "leftist leanings" run amok with their hate speech but only go after/throttle those with "right leanings" then you need to remove the scepter of power from Zuck and Jack's hands.  However, creating the regulatory agency for this is gonna be PITA.


----------



## RackMaster (Mar 31, 2019)

Our idiots in charge are already working on this to "protect" the election coming up.  In the mean time they are going overboard on trying to link our Conservative Party to right wing extremists.  It seems that the "liberal" politicians worldwide are following the same rulebook, as if there's some Globalist conspiracy.

Regulate social media, says Canadian parliamentary committee

Democratic institutions minister asks committee to look at regulating social media | CBC News

Canada considering forcing social media companies to remove extremist content


----------



## Brill (Mar 31, 2019)

ThunderHorse said:


> Does Facebook need regulating?  Same with Twitter?  If they're going to let those of "leftist leanings" run amok with their hate speech but only go after/throttle those with "right leanings" then you need to remove the scepter of power from Zuck and Jack's hands.  However, creating the regulatory agency for this is gonna be PITA.



I don’t think it should regulated at the company level but at the commodity instead.  Personal data should be considered personal property.

Pictures, posts, personal info (demographics, likes, etc) should owned like cars, boats, housing, and stuff. If owners want to rent or Airbnb-type activity, they should be compensated but if they post virtual “no trespassing” signs, that should be honored.

Government “regulation” picks a winner and loser. The winner has more lobbying power.

Edit: never did understand the election integrity thing. Does Facebook allow voting in any election?


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Mar 31, 2019)

Rofl! Zuck the Cuck giving regulatory advice is the same as a morbidly obese #600 dude giving dieting advice to the USDA.


----------



## Brill (Mar 31, 2019)

Germane? Prob not but the comedic value is off the charts!


----------



## amlove21 (Mar 31, 2019)

ThunderHorse said:


> Does Facebook need regulating?  Same with Twitter?  If they're going to let those of "leftist leanings" run amok with their hate speech but only go after/throttle those with "right leanings" then you need to remove the scepter of power from Zuck and Jack's hands.  However, creating the regulatory agency for this is gonna be PITA.


I think you answered your own question. 

We talked about it- but it’s dependent on ‘is this a utility or is it a platform’. We haven’t gotten there. 

It’s definitely a complex question- if you don’t want Twitter/FB regulated by some sort of third party, then you’re subject to whatever those companies want to regulate. If you fall in camp one? Don’t bitch when you get banned because you posted a #MAGA meme or a pedophile joke or misgender a bilogocal male or get all Alt-Righty or deadname a foxkin. 

If you fall in camp 2, and you want regulation to put an end to all that targeted moderation (so mean)? That leads to a lot of follow on questions about what is/isn’t cool to post, who does the regulation, and what constitutes a valid legal/constitutional reason to restrict someone’s ability to speak freely.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Mar 31, 2019)

I have the same beef with Facebook and Twitter allowing ISIS to use the platform to communicate and spread propaganda without consistently handing over the information to a targeting group.  It's a bit big brother esque, but that shouldn't really require a warrant, just a good head on the shoulders of an executive.


----------



## CQB (Mar 31, 2019)

Nice move & quite sensible, how can you modify your business plan if you really don’t have one? Call the policy wonks to sort it out. Regulation is long overdue in this area & can potentially lead to constraints to AI as well.


----------



## moobob (Mar 31, 2019)

CQB said:


> Nice move & quite sensible, how can you modify your business plan if you really don’t have one? Call the policy wonks to sort it out. Regulation is long overdue in this area & can potentially lead to constraints to AI as well.


I think it's more about making sure he doesn't lose market share than any noble reasons.


----------



## Salt USMC (Apr 1, 2019)

DA SWO said:


> FB needs to be treated like a utility.


Whoa a public utility? That sounds like socialism, bro


----------



## DA SWO (Apr 1, 2019)

Salt USMC said:


> Whoa a public utility? That sounds like socialism, bro


No, it's called oversight.
No different then the government setting rules for transportation, pharmaceuticals, etc.


----------



## Blizzard (Apr 1, 2019)

Fuck Zuckerberg.  Strong message to follow.


----------



## LongHiker (Apr 1, 2019)

moobob said:


> I think it's more about making sure he doesn't lose market share than any noble reasons.


That was my thought. Now that they've gained about as much market share as they're going to get, they enact regulations to protect that market share. It's pretty much big business SOP.


----------



## CQB (Apr 1, 2019)

moobob said:


> I think it's more about making sure he doesn't lose market share than any noble reasons.


As an aside, I don’t have Faceplant & I’m sure there’s an element of business acumen involved. But some govt. oversight or probity needs to be considered & maybe NIST can provide some guidance. As a minimum, some standards which can provide a framework & at the maximum end legislation. If done well, Internet security can improve overall.


----------



## AWP (Apr 2, 2019)

Zuckerberg calling for internet regulation...join us next week when Big Tobacco decries the addictive power of nicotine.


----------



## Box (Apr 2, 2019)

Zuckerberg is a reptilian from planet Nibiru with relatives living in the Draco constellation - there is no way he is human like some of us.
He is only interested in regulation now because he knows it will help limit his competition.


----------



## Poccington (Apr 2, 2019)

SORRY ABOUT MINING ALL YOUR PERSONAL DATA AND LETTING ANY PRICK WITH ENOUGH MONEY ACCESS IT GUYS BUT I REALLY THINK IT'S TIME WE GET A GRIP ON THIS WHOLE SOCIAL MEDIA THING.

Eat. A. Big. Overflowing. Bag. Of. Dicks.


----------



## 0699 (Apr 2, 2019)

He's made his billions; now he wants to close the door behind him and get government to influence what his competitors can do.


----------

