Hide Techdirt is off for the long weekend! We'll be back with our regular posts tomorrow.

Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

from the thus-spake dept

This week, both our winners on the insightful side are folks expressing their doubt about our Greenhouse guest post on thoughtfully regulating the internet. In first place, it’s an anonymous commenter focusing on the various interests at play:

The big danger for Internet regulation is that the driving force is old school publishers, and they want to reduce or eliminate the self publishing capabilities of the Internet. At the same time, the politicians want to wrest back control over political discussion, which is what is driving the attacks on section 230, while the security services want to abolish or backdoor all encryption.

If fosta/sesta is anything to go on, regulation will be used to backdoor government control over content by simply increasing the things that sites can be held liable for within user generated content.

In second place, it’s a different anonymous commenter focusing on the government’s track record:

Surely it needs to be shown that the government can effectively govern the infrastructure before it begins redefining the infrastructure to include everyone’s living room and garage?

Issues like net neutrality, reasonable price accounting and honest price reporting for simple consumer internet services, reliable maps of areas served by cable or cell-tower, addressing the digital divide–are all (1) much easier than regulating free speech; (2) inarguably constitutional, (3) currently within the authority of the government regulators, and …

(4) not even addressed, let alone solved.

Whichever government agency can solve THOSE problems … may be judged competent to define the problems of the edge.

But at this point, government regulators are allowing monolithic monopolies to give themselves huge price advantages to their own subsidiaries selling content to their captive audiences; ignoring the false advertising of prices and contract-violating price increases (both increases in hidden fees to be paid as “content fees” to their own subsidiaries, and uncontrollable, exorbitant, economically-unjustifiable costs for downloads in excess of plan); not requiring accurate reporting of areas served or speeds available in those areas; and giving money away for “expanding coverage”, then never even checking to see if the specified areas were served, or indeed if that money was even spent on services.

I’d grade that “F” in law, “F” in accounting, “F” in technology, “F” in social studies.

Those are the people that you want working on HARD problems? I wouldn’t trust them to dig a privy with both hands and a trowel.

First, walk–then run. Actually, first crawl. Maybe, first roll over and cry for a bottle.

Since that post generated a lot of debate, we’ll kick off the editor’s choice for insightful with one more comment, this time from That One Guy also focusing on the conflicting motivations:

Volume does not equal validity

While there are valid concerns regarding online platforms and services far too often the ‘concerns’ I see range from selfish concerns on the part of governments about how those platforms have the utter audacity to not just give them all the data they have and/or use encryption so the government can’t just get the info itself, individuals and groups upset that platforms have rules and keep kicking the assholes off, or entrenched companies/industries that are angry that someone came along and succeeded where they failed and so want to add in regulations crippling their new competition.

If I believed that those calling for regulations were doing so honestly and in the best interests of the public that would be one thing, but as it stands more often than not it seems the motivations are purely selfish and self-serving, with nary a care for the wider impact that their demands would have if implemented.

Next, it’s Bobvious with a comment about the appeals court ruling that said address mistakes on warrants are no big deal:


I’m sure that if a judge’s address “was used to test a department-wide computer system” there would be REAL reform REAL QUICK.

Over on the funny side, our first place winner is an anonymous commenter responding to AT&T’s attack on Section 230:

Splendid! Let’s strip AT&T of the immunities it enjoys when criminals use the phone system to commit crimes. Every time an Indian Extended-Vehicle-Warranty or IRS-collection scam call is made–every time a Nigerian money-transfer email is sent across AT&T wires–NAIL THEM FOR RICO!

Because, unlike Bad Stuff being uploaded to Youtube which cannot be spotted without human review, the phone-company nerds know how to stop the fraudulent phone calls. (It’s a matter of validating the phone originator, the protocols for which are already in place.) But the phone companies do not do this, because … well, they get paid for completing fraudulent calls.

Whatever Google or Facebook is doing, they CANNOT do anything so annoying to the general public, as those fraudulent phone calls.

Kick the elephant out of the bedroom before looking for crickets.

In second place, it’s a response to Trump’s tantrum over the FTC not doing what he wants:



For editor’s choice on the funny side, we start out with Norahc commenting on the students and parents who figured out how to game an AI exam grading system:

Edgenuity – training people to be SEO specialists at over 20,000 campuses nationwide.

Finally, it’s :Lobo Santo commenting on the administrations apparent collection of dossiers on journalists who criticize the president:

Inverted Lists

Wouldn’t it be faster and easier to list the people who’re aren’t critical of Trump?

That’s all for this week, folks!

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
ECA (profile) says:

For all the theater.

For a nation that Prides itself on being the best of everything. I tend to see correlations from China. SOME things in China seem to work better. As the STATE knows its the supreme Leader, and if the corps mess up, CHINA has a solution.(as the queen of hearts said)

For some strange reason we are paying our Politicians.(not long ago, we didnt). And it seems that they are getting more money from Elsewhere. But we dont see this on the books for all the lobbyists payoffs. Who has their hands in the cookie jar, WHERE IS that cookie jar, Because I WANT A COOKIE.
When you dont Pay wages to a group, its much easier to see where the money is coming from.
For all our banking laws, its strange that WE CANT find what our Politicians have collected.
I really wonder, if there are laws against investigative journalism, as THERE USED TO BE lots of info on our politics, esp when they were messing up.
We keep seeing BIG things happening, but there is allot more that seems to be missing the front page.

Anonymous Coward says:

Follow the money, is it not strange the company’s who want to attack section 230 are old legacy company’s who don’t like Google or startups who provide good apps and services and ways for the public to comment and post info that might criticise the government.
Old company’s who prefer to make big donations to politicians the politicians who make stupid laws like fosta.
The politicians who will bring in laws that reduce completion on the Web
There’s not a free market in America when big media company’s own isps and streaming services
and can charge extra to customers if the want to use Netflix or YouTube by setting unnecessary data caps
Att is happy to attack section 230 because it has a near monoply in most areas it operates in.
And weakening section 230 makes it harder for new devices or apps like tik Tok to compete with
the old legacy media services it owns.

ECA (profile) says:

Re: Re:

You have a few mixed parts in here…
But lets do things this way.
Amazon, even hates competing with DIRECT FROM CHINA.
NEWEGG, the same as above.
Think about Walmart, who Started this idea.

BUT, what are they doing? They are letting others sell on their sites. And taking pennies for each sale. EVEN WALMART.
What does that do?
Direct sales, less employee’s.
No handling, because UPS/DHL/.. do the work.
Distribution is on the coast, Sorted and sent.
no more employees.

Anonymous Coward says:

CORPS don’t want to compete but by making donations to politicians they can get massive tax breaks and reduce potential competion from Google
and stop other Companys from providing broadband and other media services to consumers
. The free market does not exist in most states in the USA its being taken over by crony capitalism
and political curruption.
There’s a whole industry based on selling consumers
private data to advertisers and even intelligence agency’s can buy it.
The EU is not perfect but at least it has some basic rules on selling consumers data to third party’s

ECA (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Free market,
Is a random word meaning nothing.
Nothing is free, and nothing in the market is free, from anywhere, if you are adding the middlemen.
Fair market, COULD have a meaning. But not from the USA. Our corps would rather But CHEAP, and sell HIGH, then to make any balance between the 2. China dont mind, selling millions of a product at Penny profit, its PROFIT(old capitalist). It creates work. The Middlemen love it, and markup, and the next middleman markup, and then RETAIL.
So a corp of 4-5 persons, buys up 1million products to our borders, then it get to a Distribution system, that has a list of locations and STAMPS AND SHIPS to them, which then ship to stores. And the diff in price tends to be anything from 5-100 times.
The really interesting part. IS the food we create in the USA, like frozen veggies, has a 50x markup. Farmers are getting around $0.03 per pound. And at McD, you are paying a 200x markup, and they buy diorect from the farmers.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...