Insider: Google "is bent on never letting somebody like Donald Trump come to power again."

Russian former commies are nothing like academic commies

google is a monopoly at this point. You think it's a great idea to encourage them to be political and try to influence elections?

What will happen 10 years down the road if you stay silent...
>politician that will cut googles taxes to 0
>gets promoted by google

this is how fascism starts.

Attached: Screenshot 2019-06-24 at 17.59.15.png (670x488, 51K)

now we have to ask ourselves, what are they trying to accomplish when they say they want to 'prevent next trump situation'?

are they saying they want to insert their own candidate? or are they saying they want to keep polarizing and relatively inane topics off of the airwaves to prevent people from blindly following one side or the other to promote intelligent conversation and allow for the common person to find a candidate that truly represents their needs and desires vs one that only appears to?

and to add to this, there were dozens of candidates last year, but we were left with the two most polarizing ones, the ones that would lead to the most political division when we would have been FAR better off with two more moderate candidates. so maybe google is trying to keep the actual discussion flowing while stifling the scaremongers that lead to knee-jerk voting

I dont think it would be facism, it would be more like corporatism or something because these big tech companies would essentially have control over many different world governments

Even if we assume they mean the latter, this is too much power on the hands of too few men.

Why should a private corporation be allowed to decide what is and isn't healthy discourse? How is that not tyranny?

they should just be neutral and stfu. just give the unbiased search results and let the people decide what is important by their own engagement.

but no, they think we are all bigots and morons who need to be """nudged""" into the right directions.

as far I know, they gave Hillary privileged access to their data to help her formulate her political program better. Now this should fucking scare you..

>claim "our platform is so large we're unable to police ourselves effectively"
>>Google Exec Says Don't Break Us Up: "smaller companies don't have the resources" to "prevent next Trump situation"

YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!!

Not to worry. If anyone can smite google into oblivion, it's Trump.

What is he waiting for? They will do anything they can to prevent his re-election..

If trump wasn't elected you'd get an actual fascist in a decade.

People eventually grow tired of getting trampled on. Democracy allows people to more safely lash out.
Trying to control the flow of history is not something I trust Google to do.

You're a massive fucking retarded faggot and I wish I could drive over your head with a steamroller.
Russia did absolutely fucking nothing.

this
literally a corporate republic in the making

>small company gets caught failing to police itself
>company gets shut down by the law

>large company gets caught failing to police itself
>we're too big to fail, you can't afford to lose us!

Attached: index.jpg (275x183, 6K)

>when it turns out cyberpunk wasn't really exagerating

Attached: DKvCCm2WAAI7bsq.jpg (276x368, 15K)

just a heads up, the power of the entire world is already in the hands of a few hundred people. people that all have their own agendas and ideas of how things should run.

and one thing is that google legally owns that data, so if a candidate wants to pay for it, they should be able to have access to it.

big business is crazy, because it follows the money and not the ethics. what they 'should do' isn't going to work because big business 'should' stay small and localized because the common man, and even a group of common men, aren't intelligent enough to make these kinds of macro decisions.

>corporate republic
corporate republic run by mentally ill trannies who think men can get pregnant and have periods...

Someone should press that reset button. Lets start over, this is leading nowhere...

you sound like you have a sound and logical mind. i think we should commit you to an asylum

note to self, make sure to be employed by a megacorp to ensure future wellbeing

>people that all have their own agendas and ideas of how things should run.
The objectives are the same, money, power and control.

And the electoral college does better? How does it feel to suckle from daddy guh'ment's teet?

not him, but it was a logical response to your previous statement.

you'll have to cut your dick off to fit in.. they don't really like white males. We are to them, like jews were to Hitler.

We managed to mitigate Std. Oil. Google is next.

>Who the fuck is Google to determine the will of the people?
It's just exercising its constitutionally protected right to free speech.

You live in a bubble. Very small bubble. Do you think people outside your bubble think like that about trannies?

>mitigate

you mean one of the most polluting and destructive industries on the face of the planet? i think they're still policing themselves through effective lobbying

The SCOTUS really fucked up on that one. Groups can't have rights.

ikr

They don't literally own you and your town. That's better that where we were headed.

ok Jow Forumsuys

but what can we actually do?

A corporation is a person, not a group.
Looking forward to 2036, when Google can run for president

Why is this even a discussion?
Anything that's too big to fail needs to be broken up immediately. Nothing lasts forever, and if it's too big to fail then it's just a ticking time bomb waiting to happen.

>"prevent next Trump situation"
Ironic, since the Trump situation is literally he's "too big to jail" which is what Google wishes they were. Google is no better (morally speaking) than Trump. They're just not as powerful as him ..... yet.

Attached: too-big-to-fail-2.gif (609x473, 122K)

not him but I live in the bay area and tons of people here really do think all the typical leftist bullshit that you would think would be a strawman
it may be that outside of tech circles nobody thinks that stuff, but the tech circles are the ones running these companies and in a way setting the views of the rest of culture because the internet is so significant now

Vote for anti corpo politicians that will do nothing because they can't. And enjoy our cyberpunk dystopia.

More realistically break them up before it becomes much harder.

>It's just exercising its constitutionally protected right to free speech.
yes, but they are considered a platform as well and can't be sued.

If Google wants to filter search results, maybe they should start removing the illegal content first (torrents for example).

They obviously have the capability to do so...

>>Insider: Google "is bent on never letting somebody like Donald Trump come to power again."
but why? T. has been the best goy

what company would Jow Forums actually want elected as president

>not voting for Amazon
Cringe.

Honestly, I don't think politicians or votes will do anything.
We have to fight this. There has to be a solution. How can we hurt Google?

What is this question?

AMD

>don't let google determine the will of the people
>let ISRAEL do it, and then let us argue how the substantial evidence doesn't add up
This, but misspelled Israel.

Attached: 1528938029722.jpg (680x661, 62K)

I think she meant the russian disinformation campaign not prevent next Trump.

intel prez nvidia vice prez

kek

the linux foundation

>doesn't know about project Veritas or more likely knows but dilates
Dilate.
It doesn't matter if they break them up. What matters is that have to answer - are they a publisher or are they a platform. Unlike publishers platforms have special legal protections but they MUST have no censorship. They want to have it both ways and this has to stop.

I'd like to know RMS opinion on this.
On the one hand he is a freeturd.
On the other hand he is a burnt out commie hippy.

Mama Lisa personally.

How can we unironically destroy Google?

aren't they kinda the same thing?
The whole point of the russian disinformation campaign was to get a russian spy in the presidents seat. And before you say the president isn't a spy, keep in mind the pentagon, CIA/FBI can't brief him because he'll share any info with the Russians. He fits the definition of a russian spy perfectly, even if he's an unwitting spy/agent.

rms is the old style of hippie where they still really cared about freedom of expression and were against censorship, it's not until the later gen-x and millennial hippy where you start seeing pro-censorship

Attached: Nasim Aghdam.jpg (590x350, 35K)

Make everybody realize how overvalued ads actually are.

I doubt that. They will just import more pajeets. It will never end.

His alliegience to freedom trips his alliegience to lefty politics. He's been tested before, hasn't faltered to my recollection.

I know, thats what I mean't: he is a freeturd hippie (against censorship, Google owning your data etc) but also a commie (anti Trump anti bigotry).
Would he choose Trump over Google? It's like the perfect moral dilemma for someone like him.

Wow, genuinely shocking.
How does this not have more media attention?

>for someone like him.
yes, for him. Everybody else knows whats the right choice.

why can't leftism flourish without Stalin style censorship and ideological purges?

>How does this not have more media attention?
people can't google it

Because doublethink can't exist without censorship.

these things don't contradict each other and are both correct

Show the normies the shit, then watch as they solve the problem in some horrible and disgusting way, then start to collect up the pieces to fix the shit they broke when solving it.

It's how the world works sadly.

>Would he choose Trump over Google
knowing rms he would say he doesn't have to choose and that it's a false question

obviously, Google is right here
*inserts dilator*

>What will happen 10 years down the road if you stay silent...
>>politician that will cut googles taxes to 0
>>gets promoted by google
See pic related. This is already literally happening because so many politicians INCLUDING Trump are corporate shills who allow companies to steal our tax dollars. If anything, it's worse, because these companies are paying $0 in taxes and then getting millions in tax refunds somehow. See pic related.

Attached: LackOfTaxationIsTheft.jpg (1226x856, 109K)

>Project Veritas

Attached: 1547998446687.png (882x1025, 246K)

is this some kind of pasta?

Nah it's my network fucking up and duping requests. Sorry user.

Is Microsoft also this cucked?

Attached: 1505782807233-1.jpg (696x720, 82K)

I don't forgive you

>their CEO is literally pajeet
you tell me.

Nice argument, tranny... your artificial vagina itches too much, you have no time to type?

microsoft is not nearly as cucked as most other tech giants surprisingly, although they're fairly cucked it's a little bit below average for a tech company. probably because they're sort of old school and business focused by today's tech standards. apple is also much less cucked than you would think they are going by their userbase. they're more machiavellian exploitative types than cucked.

Any company big enough to influence policy should, by definition, not exist - lest the nation ceases to be a democracy (where it's the people who influence policy).

Not that it matters anymore since we're in the endgame of the Republican Era of the USA, but you know.

seems like the shills didn't get any scripts yet.

Cool it off with the socialism Huey Long.

>can't get briefed
source?

Not a socialist, but the absence of some form of socialism (wealth redistribution) means the end for the USA's democracy. Without a middle class, you can't have democracy.

as soon as texas goes blue from mexican immigration there will never be another republican elected and a new party will need to be formed, probably the democrats will split into corporate left wing and socialist left wing

>seems like the shills didn't get any scripts yet.
lol, I guess pic related

Attached: 1561393811163.jpg (1256x656, 100K)

>wat do Jow Forums?
gb2/pol/

Not sure you can blame the reps for this. Rampant corporatism has been bipartisan since it existed pretty much.

Party loyalty is the kind of stupid game that makes people willfully deny their own subversion.

we are literally heading towards a cyberpunk dystopia where megacorporations are effectively on par with (and in some decades, above) governments.
This is late game laissez-faire capitalism; we had our chance to restrict corporations but USA fucked up as always, so enjoy leetcoding for a chance to get into one of the corporate winners i guess.

We are going to live long enough to witness the rise of neofeudalism.

Section 230 is just a practical necessity of the nature of the internet. Nowhere in the text of the bill does it mandate any sort of neutrality.

If you run an image board, like, say, Jow Forums, 230 protects you so that you can't be held liable for someone posting illegal content on it. It says nothing about what can't be removed or what reasons are acceptable to remove.

If you want to run an image board where you purge all weebs, you can do that. That's called freedom.

Being able to run your service how you want and discriminate arbitrarily is an absolutely critical right. Without this many online businesses are simply not financially viable. If you don't like how a platform is being used, don't use it. If you don't like that a platform is being used for politics, that's a problem to take up with those using it for that.

There is a serious issue with politicians regarding their social media following as their legitimate constituency. This is a backdoor for globalism. The solution to this isn't to force them to fail by cutting off their means to discriminate, thereby destroying their relationship with advertisers by causing an exodus of normies who don't want their query for "world war 2" to have "but muh 6 million" results in there.

There may, however, be a serious anti-trust issue as well, with regard to tech giant collusion with payment processors to stifle competition. This is and should be investigated and stopped.

The solution is to fix the anti-trust shit and have take some personal responsibility. Alternatives exist, despite being repeatedly cut off at the knees by the tech giants. Taking away the anti-trust knife from them will help facilitate more.

If your complaint is you can't reach normies, well, tough shit. They get to chose what they look at and it's not going to be sites like Jow Forums. If you make the sites they do look at like Jow Forums, they'll stop looking at them. You're not entitled to the audience of your choosing.

feudalism is a more stable form of government than democracy is, I'm pretty sure it would eventually have happened again no matter what

I was joking. But you are indeed basically agreeing with Long. And I agree with the sentiment.

Capitalism is a mean, not an end.

Take the Ted pill already

Attached: 1534703874916.jpg (750x717, 59K)

Remember when the Google corporate meeting happened right after the election and they openly, as company policy, talked about the election as a loss?

Break Google up. They think they're above the law. They're treasonous, designing a censored web for China. It's fucking disgusting.

Not blaming the reps for this, it is - as you said - something that has been long in the making.

Gilded Age II: Cyber Boogaloo. Except I don't think we'll get out of this one.