Technology
Which posts fit here?
Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
[email protected]
[email protected]
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
view the rest of the comments
It's one thing to move fast and sell data to sketchy buyers. It's another thing to give an unelected agency admin the power to interpret, enforce, and adjudicate laws with no oversights. That sort of thing never ends well.
Even if you absolutely hate big tech, what happens if some agency admin who has no idea what the fediverse is sees something they don't like and say decides to hit the Mastodon nonprofit for 10% of their income per "violation". No recourse, it doesn't matter if it's on some random xyz Nazi instance unaffiliated with Mastodon development. Agency man said it's a violation so pay up.
I heard a quote once. Something along the lines of I cut down every law to get to the devil, but once I got there he turned and said now that you've cut down each law what will protect you?
Yes, the SEC is important and it answers to the court. If an unelected SEC admin makes a bad call they can get shot down. Happens all the time. But you want an example? Oh boy, I gotta story for you.
The EPA has the power to regulate navigable waterways (rivers, lakes, etc.) given by Congress under the clean waters act. So they also said they could regulate swamps and estuaries. Fair enough, they're connected so something that effects those will effect the navigable waterways. Then they said they can regulate ditches and small disconnected streams. I mean all that stuff is sorta connected but it's really stretching it and not what congress intended with that law.
Then they said that if birds land in a puddle in your backyard it's a navigable waterway. Of course if a bird lands in a puddle then lands in a river those two things are the same and the EPA can regulate your backyard because it's now a navigable waterway. Doesn't matter that you're in the Arizona desert.
[The Wikipedia page if I sound like I'm quoting the onion] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migratory_bird_rule)
The court gave them a pretty big bitch slap, and we're probably going to lose Chevron doctrine over it. Regulatory bodies always seek to expand their power. With no oversight things get bad fast.
Besides, how do you know someone at Google/Facebook/Microsoft etc won't set "hey regulator, mind just bankrupting our competition or running them out of the UK?" All they need to do is convince one unelected official, no oversight needed.
Unfettered regulatory agency power that makes a random admin judge jury and executioner is a bad decision. I know the hate boner for big tech is strong here, but give it some time. I'm sure within the next 5/10 years the Lemmy crowd will be freaking out when some admin does something very bad and there's no recourse.