Reply With QuoteI wonder if “ Zucker-miester” had it shut down to get users to complain to their elected officials.
| Search Fishin.com |
Senior Member
Man, all day outage for the premiere social media platforms.......
BIG ass slap in the face today.........WOW.
I wonder if it has something to do with the whistle blower hammering them yesterday on 60 minutes.
It will be interesting to see what this is all about.
Later,
Geo
Senior Member
Senior Member
From what I've read they built *everything* to route through their own servers, so once the bad router packets got out there they were dead in the water. Including the security access key cards to the data center where they had to go to manually reset the servers. They had to use a grinder to get in LOL
Senior Member
Interested in your thoughts :
Facebook being questioned about putting profits over insuring content is not harmful, inaccurate, or intentionally inciting solely to increase user following and increase advertising profit.
News networks selling advertising the same as Facebook does and also profits from greater following. We have all seen where what was reported was not full, factual, and incited in some cases protests and riots.
So should not both entities be held to higher standards of truth and accuracy with penalties available when their actions knowledgeably incite and support unrest?
Senior Member
Disclaimer in advance: The ultimate responsibility for personal behavior rests with the individual no matter what that individual sites as provocation.
Senior Member
Theoretically yes, but who you gonna trust to determine violations?Originally Posted by ZoraSpook
Senior Member
Mark is afraid of regulations
Senior Member
The courts. FTC, FCC, and FBI and DHS. And, civil suit actions as the apply.
Senior Member
The courts. FTC, FCC, and FBI and DHS. And, civil suit actions as they apply.
Senior Member
EXCEPT 230 allows people to say ANY **** they want to about anyone they want to.
Trump cannot effectively sue the sum bitches that published the dossier due to 230. IF you don't see that as a problem, we well we have a serious issue.
In reality ALL companies participating in SOCIAL MEDIA should lose their 230 protections. Once that happens, the slanderous **** on those sites will END.
230 was created in 1994............and it has never been updated.
Yes persons are responsible for what they post, but NO ONE is ever held responsible.
It needs to be fixed.
Later,
Geo
Senior Member
FACEBOOK, TWITTER and the likes have already violated significant laws................They get away with ********, because 230 allows them to .
And civil suits have to prove malice under 230. Actually under 230 and sulivan v NYT.
Things need to change.
Later,
Geo
Senior Member
These social media companies are not unlike the newspaper and TV shows on Cable News. All of them need to tell the **** truth and if they allow others to publish BS on their site then they should be held fully responsible for that publication. Because each post that appears on social media is just like anything posted on a TV show. I think that the internet which is carried over wires and fiber optic cables is no different than TV and Radio that travels over the airwaves. Congress needs to change the laws and regulate all forms of mass media to make sure that BS is not spread all across the country.
Posting Permissions
