Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "Big Tech CEOs and Congress agree to more censorship" video.

  1. That's the trap. Bring the government in. Do you really think that'll turn out well? The only way this BS goes away is to let the market do its thing, in my opinion. I would argue that the Communications Decency Act and especially Section 230, is government over-reach and a violation of the 1st Amendment. The WORST thing is to turn Big Tech into utilities. The BEST thing is to NOT give Big Tech special privileges to behave as publishers while falling under "platform" law. That means LET Big Tech censor, but also expose them to LAWSUITS from private citizens.
    4
  2.  @kevinmcfarlane2752  Yes. Breakup brings the government, which is controlled/influenced heavily by big-money Big Tech. Everybody will cheer the break-up, and the government will sneak in more regulations that will crush any new competition. Competition is the key, and competition would quickly eliminate losers like Zuckerberg and Dorsey.
    4
  3. Alternative systems exist. Yet here you and I are.
    3
  4. Abolish Communications Decency Act and its Section 230 that protects the censorious Big Tech at the expense of any new competitors. Government stepping in will just make the problem worse, the same as it has done to numerous other industries. You wonder why Big beats Small? Because that's the nature of government regulation. Right when the public thinks the government is sticking it to the big corporations, it is HELPING the big corporation. Complex regulations destroy small outfits that can't afford to comply with all the complicated rules. Small outfits can't hire a "compliance officer" whose only job is to keep the regulators happy. Small companies aren't big enough to hire anyone who doesn't actually PRODUCE something. Liberals and progressives do the bidding of big corporations while spending all their time complaining about big corporations. When CONSERVATIVES start screaming for the government to step in and "fix" Big Tech, then we are lost. If government just backed off and let everyone compete, the bad practices of Big Tech would destroy their bottom line. These PLATFORMS should just be PLATFORMS. Like the phone service has no right to monitor and censor phone conversations. There are already plenty of laws on the books. If YouTube's business model says they should censor content on their platform, then let them. And because they choose to censor, they become publishers. Because they are publishers, they should fall under all the same rules and regulations that apply to publishers. They should not have it both ways. It's bad for the public and it's bad for them, too, in the long run. You want to protect children? Have a KidTube to which access is totally under parents' control. Instead of worrying about filtering OUT bad content, let the parents decide what channels they will ALLOW, with a default door lock on everything else. On AdultTube, anything should go, consistent with the traditional standards of libel, slander, threats of violence and inciting violence. Communications Decency Act and Fairness Doctrine (created when regressive Christians were afraid somebody might use a cuss word on-air) end up meaning the opposite, in actual practice, because NO ONE should have the right to decide these things. If someone is blatantly breaking the law, then there are courts for that, already.
    1