Well we knew it had to be something. I mean most of Congress is too old to know what a tik tok is.
They’re just too old for everything. They’re almost part of ancient history.
Tic Tac Toe!
Media headlines that use the word lobbying probably do it so that people don’t take up arms. If they were to instead call it bribery, I think a lot more people would take issue with the whole process.
they can’t really do that because that would be defamation and they would be sued for it. Bribery is a crime and while it is effectively the same as lobbying from our perspective, one is legal and one is not and a media outlet can’t just accuse someone of a crime without evidence unless they want to close up shop
When in practice Corruption is not investigated or prosecuted, nobody ever gets convicted of Corruption, the Media can’t talk about Corruption as it would otherwise be defamation, hence the country has no Corruption.
I haven’t lived in the US but I lived in the UK and this was exactly how Britain had “no Corruption”.
Except the only thing that will be prosecuted, or adjudicated, is the claim of libel entered by Meta, for suggesting their millions are anything other than legal contributions to something or other.
There is a solution, though, staring us all right in the face.
Shit, we should also ban insta, fb, and google places while we’re at it.
“but muh marketplace!” “but muh highschool friends I haven’t seen in a decade+!” “but muh extended family I haven’t spoken to since I was 8!”
Addicts won’t quit Meta. I’ve even seen posts on Lemmy with people defending Facebook. It’s gross.
I used to say those same things, now I basically just keep messenger as a job requirement but the rest of it can F off
marketplace is nothing but spam and scam, and those “friends” the only ones I care to talk to, use discord, or regular phone text
Isn’t messenger app the worst of them all?
Just force them to use open standards and for it to be easy for people to move platform whilst keeping all the connections to their profile: the power of such social media entities is that people are locked-in because if they move they lose the connections of both followers and those they follow, which often means family and friends.
Basically a solution similar to that adopted in Europe for phone numbers - that you can take your number with you when you move providers - would reduced social media companies down to “just a pipe for social media connectivity” which would ultimatelly kill those with the worst practices given that the barrier to entry to be a “social media provider” is way lower than to be a fixed line telephony provider.
Don’t tempt me with a good time.
Actually, be very tempted please! Get 'm!
We are on a social network platform too?
One where you can use any server and client you wish, as long as it implements the same freely-available spec. You can probably access the source code of the server and client you’re using.
As with many things: the problem is not the technology itself, but the terms that capital owners demand we accept in order to use it.
Not really. It’s just a fancy forum.
Social network platforms have corporate controlled algorithms designed to maximize addiction. At the very least, you would need a “friend” system and who the fuck follows each other on here? When I was using reddit, one person followed me and it was a bot.
As if the US government could understand this platform. It will be a shame to lose lemmy.world though
The reason we have a Chinese competitor that we cannot directly control is that Meta is buying up every promising US platform and shutting it down. Or just trying to copy it so that the competitor does not get enough users
As if anti-trust law doesn’t exist. It is crazy to me nowadays, most tech startup’s goal from the very start is to sale to a big tech competitor. This certainly should have anti-trust implications.
Nope. The legal system is pay to win.
What platforms has meta bought and shut down?
I can think of zero examples myself.
CrowdTangle, MetaSpark, Moves, Onavo, Bump, Parse, etc
Not sure, most of the companies they buy they claim are to acquire their workers. They’ve bought over 90 companies from what I saw in a quick search.
Headlines that basically say the same shit twice really are swell.
If you want to produce the same shit twice, just use a colon.
So what does Zuck do when Trump uses an exec order to stay the ban and pushes Republicans to reverse it?
If Zuck gives Trump more money then why would he? Probably would just allow Meta to buy it or something dumb like that.
Algorithmically quell his own cybernetic rage.
Well I just hope they reverse the whole bill, so we can tr-appropriate the tax money back we sent to aid Israel
It’s already back up lmfao
Yep. But this doesn’t answer their question. I’m rooting for a Tik Tok CEO vs Meta CEO battle Royale at the inauguration.
Tom just sitting on the sidelines, eating popcorn.
Trumps just gonna keep him hanging hoping he’s in the inner circle and bleeding him dry in the process.
Why does everyone think Trumps going to allow Tiktok. He doesn’t like China, and Musk is going to push him to ban it so he can buy it.
You’re partially right. Trump originally wanted to ban TikTok because “China.”
However, the platform’s influence on younger voters supposedly helped him to win the election, so he now favors it.
No surprise that Trump’s personal needs are far more important than real US security.
ByteDance has a lot of money. Trump likes money. Trump’s only leverage over ByteDance is allowing TikTok, so he’ll do that in exchange for money
Zuckerberg and Meta are much more centralized in the US, which gives Trump far more options in terms of what he can offer them. Trump will give Zuckerberg something else to placate him. Probably lots of cheap H-1B labor
I haven’t seen a comment age this quickly and poorly in quite some time.
If you haven’t noticed Trump says a lot of things. He’s always talking out of both sides of his mouth. I’ll believe it when I see it, we’ll see tomorrow. Also, a delay is not overturning it.
It’s back now with a message thanking President Trump.
Which makes the whole thing so transparent considering Trump literally couldn’t have done anything as he’s still not president yet… The whole thing was a stunt.
Who asked for a 50% stake in the company.
“Issues related to voter suppression/interference, political ads and misinformation policies.”
It’s nice to see meta have learned from their own mistakes and are now trying to protect
democracyprofits.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook–Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal
I think this was less about lobbying and more about bogeyman of China.
AIPAC lobbying also
You know China vetoed a Gaza Ceasefire last march, right?
They’re also allied with Iran who militarized Hamas in the first place.
Stop spreading lies.
Gaza: Security Council passes resolution demanding ‘an immediate ceasefire’ during Ramadan https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147931
I don’t know why I do this to myself, but I read through Meta’s disclosure
Every single lobbyist I looked at worked in DC before becoming a lobbyist. I knew it happened a lot, but it’s really depressing to see
Also, why do these disclosures not require companies to specify how the money was spent? There are only ~20 different lobbyists mentioned, and Meta spent 7.6M in a single quarter
Yes, companies hiring people in politics or with government connections is a very normal thing
$7.6 million, pocket change to these chumps. Up the ante!
Good, finally putting that money to good use.
Stifling competition, great use indeed. Make today’s billionaires trillionaires.
