What can we do against tech giants wanting suppress opinions and trying to control the world ?

It is easy(ish) to create them. The hard part is getting people to actually use them. You need money to market, big money. You need to pay server fees, domain names, eventually hire people, etc. This is only if you were to create a direct competitor of a big company. Though, big company would probably offer you $5mil.

I think we should all just go back to making personal sites and online meetups. Whatever happened to fucking chat rooms and shit?

google, twitter, facebook didn't need big money to sway people to use their services, they were just good.

the question would be, is there a market big enough for people who want real uncensored information out there ?

Yes they did. You think they just dug thousands of dollars out of their pocket to pay for the servers? They maybe got a few thousand users, and then reached out to investors -> people that would then have decisions on the company, and help run it. They didn't just throw their shit up for free. In the beginning, sure they didn't need big money. But when the thousands come, they did.

> is there a market big enough for people who want real uncensored information out there
Tor has millions of users every single month, so yes.

> tor

tor is almost exclusively used by tech users. You wont find your illiterate normie using it or willing to give it a try.

An alternative to facebook or google cannot be built on something underground like tor.

>You wont find your illiterate normie using it or willing to give it a try.
That's far from the truth. There are tons of average people on tor. Many people for example will use tor to buy medicine they cannot afford to buy legally. It's not that complicated to use. In fact, it's pretty fucking easy. If a normie can download Chrome, they can download tor.

>An alternative to facebook or google cannot be built on something underground like tor.
They already exist.

This

You really can't. They'll just shut down your servers or domain name.

>google, twitter, facebook didn't need big money to sway people to use their services, they were just good.

>What is venture capital?

>google
>Google was initially funded by an August 1998 contribution of $100,000 from Andy Bechtolsheim, co-founder of Sun Microsystems; the money was given before Google was incorporated.[27] Google received money from three other angel investors in 1998: Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos, Stanford University computer science professor David Cheriton, and entrepreneur Ram Shriram.[28]

>twitter
>Twitter launches as a product of parent company Odeo. It grows slowly until March 2007, where usage grows dramatically after it is showcased at the South by Southwest Interactive (SXSW) conference.
>Odeo was originally developed in 2005[1] by founders Noah Glass and Evan Williams, who were the founders of Audioblog and Pyra Labs, respectively, and received funding from Charles River Ventures.

>facebook
>Facebook was initially incorporated as a Florida LLC. For the first few months after its launch in February 2004, the costs for the website operations for thefacebook.com were paid for by Mark Zuckerberg and Eduardo Saverin, who had taken equity stakes in the company. The website also ran a few advertisements to meet its operating costs.[55]
>In the summer of 2004, venture capitalist Peter Thiel made a $500,000 angel investment in the social network Facebook for 10.2% of the company and joined Facebook's board. This was the first outside investment in Facebook.[56][57][58]

>didn't need big money to sway people to use their services, they were just good.
Retard.

>The hard part is getting people to actually use them.
You mean it is hard to not get shut down as soon as you gain traction, because unless you own all the infrastructure you are susceptible to get fucked over.
>You need to pay server fees
If you are lucky that whoever owns the server will allow you to be a customer
> domain names
If you are lucky that whoever sells them deems you worthy of being able to have one

Attached: 1415087699878.png (3500x2520, 306K)

They can't shut down your servers if you use your own. Be a hell of a lot more expensive, but so be it. I don't think they can revoke your domain name, as the registrant has rules, and if you don't break the rules, there's no reason for them to revoke the domain name.

>I don't think they can revoke your domain name, as the registrant has rules, and if you don't break the rules, there's no reason for them to revoke the domain name.
So naive, so much to learn.

THIS

sillyCOHEN valley boycott when?

Attached: kayaksBTFO.png (634x440, 680K)

Stop falling for the "platform" meme, and start doing things yourself.
>in before someone replies "what about X technology?" totally missing the point

Complete anonymity and decentralisation at ISP level so no one fiddles with information. And that will never happen. Either liveinawoods, grow the balls and power to oppose them or stfu.

point was that the money was used to fund development, not to advertise their services.

it seems to me that, people are never going to leave youtube or google unless you provide a better, easier, cheaper service which is impossible for a small team.

Do people even want an alternative to the tech giants ?

so you are saying that it's impossible to create truly free competitors to the big tech companies ?

are we fucked ?

you have a skewed view of the world because you are in tech. The vast majority of the millions of people that use facebook, google and twitter have never used tor.

> They already exist.
no they dont, they are shady centralized companies doing the same thing as google or facebook.

remember how google started ? don't be evil ? centralized companies change the moment they have money poured in.

>not to advertise their services.
Wrong. Google paid to have it's search engine be the default in web browsers back in the 90s. In fact, all search engines do. Still. DDG pays a premium to be the default choice in Firefox. Google could, if they wanted, easily outbid DDG for Firefox. But it doesn't need to now that they have Chrome.

Facebook and Twitter used their VC to pay for SEO and getting themselves to the top of search results on search engines.

If you think all VC went to development and infrastructure with nothing going towards advertising and promotion, you're a retard.

Competition is only necessary for a free market.

Attached: 7CCA5B683CEE4B409DD4E9800EA7BC09.jpg (1100x543, 91K)

> let me start my own ISP so I can fund my social network bro

Join them

We were fucked from the start.

>create an alternstive!
>gets labeled alt right nazi company
>hated by the masses
>kicked off domain name provides and probably blacklisted by lower tier ISPs
Uh-huh, give it up

>waah, why don people let me post whatever I want!
If you want to bother people so much, just go outside and directly shitpost irl with like-minded people you fucking autists.
>Being so much of an entitled brat that you expect corporations to give you access to their products for free and with do catches.

granted some funds went into marketing but google was groundbreaking technology, it was simply good.

why do the majority of people use google instead of something like bing ? its because google is simply better at what it does.

in tech, if you build a good product and put it out there you wont need to do any marketing.

nobody is asking permission to post whatever they want. The biggest alarming issue here is that you cannot even compete with them because they will try to kill you at the isp/domain/server level.

As I said, totally missing the point.

speak clearly retard

How about you don't be /pol 2.0?

That thinking about needing a specific "platform" to exist to share and spread information is wrong-headed and learned helplessness. People had no problem sharing and spreading countless documents covering shady or illegal stuff without a central acting body. People with floppy drives and BBSs had far more freedom of speech that we do now, and it wasn't due to the technology but the culture and the temperament of the people involved.

Because "It's ok to be white." is now hate speech.

Ah, yes, so Gab was banned from everywhere because they posted "It's okay to be white"? Or because every time you opened it you were greeted with endless "fuck kikes and niggers" spam? If you behave like a poltard don't be surprised when nobody wants to associate with you.

The only way to fight against tech giants is to become yet another tech giant. It's the harsh truth.

For instance, on Youtube one of the best features for most content creators is live streams. There are more platforms for it but overall none as good as YouTube. Yet we are clearly seeing people who -need- an alternative for this that doesn't censor or take down content in a very biased way.

Other platforms are hard to replace as well, because they are backed and used by corporations all over the world.

the discussion is about how to create truly free platforms that can reach millions of people.

These days if a person is banned on twitter, instagram, facebook and youtube he is effectively nonexistent to the majority of the western world.

freedom to reach millions of people is being controlled by these big tech companies.

>anyone who thinks it's ok to be white must hate Jews and blacks

Get backed to twatter you unloved tranny.

> truly free platforms that can reach millions of people.
Then you're setting yourself up for failure.

If the dominant outlets are all compromised, you go under them, and over them, and around them, anything but THROUGH them. Think more about Samizdat and less about trying to piece together your own printing press.

Also think more in terms of quality rather than quantity when it comes to the people you're reaching.

Go to literally any mildly lengthy politics thread on twitter and it's full of spergs ranting about all kinds of stupid shit. If you're too spergy to participate in that, you should probably reconsider your life instead of whining about free speech.

>Create a flag that deliberately resembles a nazi flag
>get assblasted when people realise it and call you out
>waah, they callin us nazis an sheit!
>Create phrases with innuendos
>Get mad when people find out about your "super sekrit klub" and finds out what those phrases mean
>waah! we dindu nuffin! we wuz good boys! why can't we ever say anything without being replied to by normies?

Maybe if you ever made an account and got into it you would know what you're talking about. At best back in 2016 it got a lot of MAGA posting. That was it.

Besides if what you keep banning and keeping away those "dangerous" people (some of which are awfully milquetoast, by the way, and you should probably off yourself if you think anything they say is actually offensive) as opposed to other similar people on the other side, what the fuck are you expecting to find elsewhere? I guess you just want most people who don't think like you to be completely excommunicated and unable to use any social media?

If you keep going like "create your own alternative" and then you take it down, you're everything that most people should be against, whether they are left or right leaning.

Decide to combat megacorp team 1 influence with megacorp team 2's "oh no no we definitely don't want them doing that my god they did that heaven is me that's just awful" squad

Fuck off dude, you're a political newbie and your opinions are barely fucking baked you just heard them, wait 5 years and you'll understand how all the normal people feel

This board's tranny wave has arrived.

I didn't do any of that. I just think it's ok to be white, but am not allowed to say that.

>what is diaspora
>what is firendica
>what is gnu social
>what is mastodon
>what is peertube
>what is gnu mediagoblin

It's true that for search engines there aren't great alternatives but we can use projects like searx to anonimize our trafic.

I think it's ok to be white, the problem is that it is an obvious counter reaction to the black lives matter mouvement

of course there's the market
I watched so much uncensored content pour into vid.me
Then they had to shut down prolly cause they didn't allow the DoD backdoor access
So yeah there's desire, but you won't get to survive.. They'll buy you first and if you don't take the money they'll just eventually get some1 to kill u as a last resort.
i2p node on every pc and phone but how? build it into the cpu or some shit. you'd need ur own fkn wafer fab.

So the hope doesn't lie in the proles after all?

>I think it's ok to be white
Reported for hate speech.

It never did.

Attached: BOWDEN.png (1124x1165, 171K)

>where's companyx
>It's too hard to make something new
Brainletmeter's goin crazy

That's some Yugoslav friend
Google funneled millions into public TV advertisements with stars like Justin Bieber and even more traditional advertisements in newspapers and stuff on the streets

>68327498
Thoughts on Kim Dotcom's alternative?bbc.com/news/technology-44368811

I wonder if some it'll be necessary to create legislation against social media services, given how they're tearing apart the fabric of society (at least in America).

*if some day

I seriously think there is a market for services that are censored/manipulated/users data sold/tracked 24/7.

Also, we a government with the will to break these huge companies up into 10 or so competing companies each. No company should be able to have as much influence as google or facebook. Break em up

Stop feeding them obviously

easier said than done. how do you tell women to stop going to youtube or instagram ? its impossible

the biggest problem is that these companies make a lot of money, so they can buy whoever they want.

OP pic really should have been based on pic related.
The only options we have for reigning in big tech are either getting people to stop using their services or wait for the US government to regulate them. I don't know which is less likely.

Attached: 1525699749473.jpg (800x1076, 353K)

>stop using their services
Yeah you can start by stop using Jow Forums first