Jump to content

Public Club

Topical News

Specializes in Psych, Medical. Has 13 years experience.

Something to understand what nurses think about re the Current News and their opinions!

Curious1997, BSN

Specializes in Psych, Medical. Has 13 years experience.

What does people think about facebook's stance re Australia? 

I think Zuckerberg is going to find out he's really stirred the Hornet's nest here. He's literally holding a country hostage incl the govt, hospitals etc. 

He seems to think he's above the law of countries! He's a cheapskate in wanting to plagiarize other people's work and not pay for it. He's also incurring the wrath of Murdoch and Google and I think the precedents set will be instituted across the world re facebook and Google. 

This guy wants to be the next Ted Cruz or Josh Hawley re popularity! I think both facebook and Google needs to be spun into smaller independent entities because of their business models. They need regulations re people's personal information and dissemination of it. This should then influence all the apps downline. They weild way too much power and both organizations have been very insidious recently! 

Have you seen the permissions required for certain apps? These people are accessing and influential in most of our lives. They are shaping the news, pushing products that pay the most, instead of free market influences. 

Anyone who controls information, runs the world. Ask Rupert Murdoch! Wars can be started on propaganda and maintained. Zuckerberg thinks he's above the law based on the senate hearing performances. If he was actually intelligent instead of greedy and use facebook for the good of everyone, it would be understandable. 

I really think he's bitten of more than he can chew especially with Aussies. They are very independent, stubborn people! 

Beerman, BSN

Has 11 years experience.

8 hours ago, Curious1997 said:

What does people think about facebook's stance re Australia? 

Why would I care?

Curious1997, BSN

Specializes in Psych, Medical. Has 13 years experience.

13 minutes ago, Beerman said:

Why would I care?

We reveal who we are by what we care about. 

You don't think that what happens in Australia can impact us here? 

How about the Middle East re gas prices or China re products? We are interconnected Beerman. 

Do you remember Covid-19 and where it came from? You don't think we are isolated now, do you? 

Beerman, BSN

Has 11 years experience.

14 minutes ago, Curious1997 said:

We reveal who we are by what we care about. 

You don't think that what happens in Australia can impact us here? 

How about the Middle East re gas prices or China re products? We are interconnected Beerman. 

Do you remember Covid-19 and where it came from? You don't think we are isolated now, do you? 

All of this, has nothing to do with Austrailians not being able to post news on facebook.

So, I'm comfortable revealing myself as someone who doesnt care.

 

TheMoonisMyLantern, ADN, LPN, RN

Specializes in Mental health, substance abuse, geriatrics, PCU. Has 14 years experience.

3 hours ago, Beerman said:

All of this, has nothing to do with Austrailians not being able to post news on facebook.

So, I'm comfortable revealing myself as someone who doesnt care.

 

From my understanding the relevance to the U.S. is that this power move that facebook has performed is adding fuel to the fire of government officials who feel that facebook is a monopoly and violates antitrust laws. There's been a push for a while to break companies like facebook, Google, even Amazon up and people believe this action from facebook could spur further action from people that support this.

I admit, I don't really know how I feel about this. Obviously social media companies have gained enormous amount of influence and even control over our lives and that can certainly foster nefarious actions by those in control. That being said, I kind of lean towards letting the internet be the wild-wild west in many ways versus adding more regulations. I'd be really interested to hear more opinions on this.

10 hours ago, Beerman said:

All of this, has nothing to do with Austrailians not being able to post news on facebook.

So, I'm comfortable revealing myself as someone who doesnt care.

 

It doesn't matter to American conservatives if others suffer...only if they suffer.  It doesn't matter if other humans lose rights, it matters if American conservatives believe that they are losing rights.  It's the age of tribalism in the American political story.

Opinion: Steve Bannon’s vile threats show the GOP’s radicalization is getting worse

Quote

A loony plot to impeach Biden
Bannon’s second threat is even more comically absurd. He recently told a Boston audience that he hopes to see Trump run for Congress in 2022, then run for speaker of the House (which Bannon presumes Republicans will win), then preside over the impeachment of President Biden:
“We totally get rid of Nancy Pelosi, and the first act of President Trump as speaker will be to impeach Joe Biden for his illegitimate activities of stealing the presidency,” Bannon said, leading to applause and hollers from the Boston Republicans.
This is rank crackpottery, but here again, the singular organizing and motivating principle is the idea that Trump’s loss to Biden couldn’t possibly have been legitimate, or that there’s simply zero obligation on the part of the Trump movement to recognize it as such, and that loyalty to Trump requires unwavering fealty to that idea.

Unwavering fealty or...

Curious1997, BSN

Specializes in Psych, Medical. Has 13 years experience.

9 hours ago, TheMoonisMyLantern said:

From my understanding the relevance to the U.S. is that this power move that facebook has performed is adding fuel to the fire of government officials who feel that facebook is a monopoly and violates antitrust laws. There's been a push for a while to break companies like facebook, Google, even Amazon up and people believe this action from facebook could spur further action from people that support this.

I admit, I don't really know how I feel about this. Obviously social media companies have gained enormous amount of influence and even control over our lives and that can certainly foster nefarious actions by those in control. That being said, I kind of lean towards letting the internet be the wild-wild west in many ways versus adding more regulations. I'd be really interested to hear more opinions on this.

I think the internet has to be regulated! 

Child pornography, Bitcoin, swindling elders, Proud Boys, manipulating elections etc to name just a miniscule few illegal things that go on hourly on the internet. It's an extremely dangerous medium where things that we can't even imagine is happening. 

I think free market is a myth propagated by the people controlling information as Gamestop just proved and Bitcoin is now proving. Prediction: people are going to get seriously hurt re Bitcoin. And mediums like facebook is one of the main reasons by giving culprits the medium to share the misinformation. It's going to be hijacked! 

Information is power as we all know like when we've caught our sister up to no good and she doesn't want your Dad to find out😊🤗. Murdoch's hold on the British and Australian govt officials in bygone years and his influences re elections etc. facebook and Google know the most intimate details about people and use it for their personal nefarious reasons and you can't even complain to them! They violate every antitrust law in the book. 

You need educated, independent (non denominational, political) INVISIBLE bodies in each country, if possible regulating the internet for their own country's needs. Juries accomplish this mostly, just supersize the process. I don't know about other people but I almost NEVER get people's character wrong. Just in this forum you can tell (toomuchbaloney, nursej22, macawake, to name a few) possess the intelligence and the ethics to be on such a panel and I don't know these people. You can tell people by their output and behaviors. 

Kitiger, RN

Specializes in Private Duty Pediatrics. Has 42 years experience.

Could the answer be to have multiple platforms, that it, platforms similar to face book, but at least 3 or 4 of them? I think - but I don't know - that this is what Parlor was trying to do. (So far, I have only tried face book; I have not tried Twitter or Parlor or any of the others.)

With face book on the left, and Parlor on the right, and hopefully several  others, face book could have its fact checkers blocking out the far right, and Parlor could have its fact checkers blocking out the far left. And people like me could read the different sites and come to our own conclusions.

Curious1997, BSN

Specializes in Psych, Medical. Has 13 years experience.

How Democrats Are Already Maneuvering to Shape Biden’s First Supreme Court Pick! 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/21/us/politics/biden-supreme-court-black-woman.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

 

This is a topic of concern to me currently. 

My natural choice would be to have the person best qualified for the job regardless of sex, race, denomination or politics. My emotional response is that I want liberal judges and I want them to be in superior numbers to counteract the republicans. 

Ideally, anyone who has shown any sort of bias or opinion re politics or religion should be disqualified immediately, IMO. 

I want objective people with no agenda whatsoever whether I agree with them or not. 

What say you? 

28 minutes ago, Curious1997 said:

[...]

Ideally, anyone who has shown any sort of bias or opinion re politics or religion should be disqualified immediately, IMO. 

I want objective people with no agenda whatsoever whether I agree with them or not. 

What say you? 

I'm somewhat confused.  Haven't you stated in at least one other thread that you wanted the Democrats to pack the Supreme Court with liberal judges?

Curious1997, BSN

Specializes in Psych, Medical. Has 13 years experience.

41 minutes ago, chare said:

I'm somewhat confused.  Haven't you stated in at least one other thread that you wanted the Democrats to pack the Supreme Court with liberal judges?

My natural choice would be to have the person best qualified for the job regardless of sex, race, denomination or politics. My emotional response is that I want liberal judges and I want them to be in superior numbers to counteract the republicans. 

That's my emotional response, yes! Which is my preference. 

What's best for the country is objectivity. But republicans don't appear to like playing within the rules? So if you can't beat them, join them! Them are the rules that republicans apparently want. 

Roe vs Wade, Gerrymandering, Citizens United, Obamacare. 

Beerman, BSN

Has 11 years experience.

2 hours ago, chare said:

I'm somewhat confused.  Haven't you stated in at least one other thread that you wanted the Democrats to pack the Supreme Court with liberal judges?

Also, in that post said wanted  "liberal judges and want them in superior numbers."  LOL

 

TheMoonisMyLantern, ADN, LPN, RN

Specializes in Mental health, substance abuse, geriatrics, PCU. Has 14 years experience.

11 hours ago, Curious1997 said:

I think the internet has to be regulated! 

Child pornography, Bitcoin, swindling elders, Proud Boys, manipulating elections etc to name just a miniscule few illegal things that go on hourly on the internet. It's an extremely dangerous medium where things that we can't even imagine is happening. 

I think free market is a myth propagated by the people controlling information as Gamestop just proved and Bitcoin is now proving. Prediction: people are going to get seriously hurt re Bitcoin. And mediums like facebook is one of the main reasons by giving culprits the medium to share the misinformation. It's going to be hijacked! 

Information is power as we all know like when we've caught our sister up to no good and she doesn't want your Dad to find out😊🤗. Murdoch's hold on the British and Australian govt officials in bygone years and his influences re elections etc. facebook and Google know the most intimate details about people and use it for their personal nefarious reasons and you can't even complain to them! They violate every antitrust law in the book. 

You need educated, independent (non denominational, political) INVISIBLE bodies in each country, if possible regulating the internet for their own country's needs. Juries accomplish this mostly, just supersize the process. I don't know about other people but I almost NEVER get people's character wrong. Just in this forum you can tell (toomuchbaloney, nursej22, macawake, to name a few) possess the intelligence and the ethics to be on such a panel and I don't know these people. You can tell people by their output and behaviors. 

There are horrific things that the internet is used for, no doubt, and certainly our legal system attempts to deal with those activities. My concern is that despite that negative things, there are also quite a few good things the internet provides. The most important of which is information. Who do we give the power to regulate the internet to? Right now corporations like facebook seem to have most of the power on their side when it comes to controlling what information is available on their platform. Is that the way it should stay? Should the government be trusted to regulate what information is available and what can be expressed? Should some some invisible shadow council be formed to regulate the internet? I don't know that I would trust any of these solutions to not be abused either intentionally or not.

In the same vein, and please not I found the capitol riots revolting and disturbing, yet some of the actions taken social media, lawmakers, and various companies have planted a seed of concern in the back of my mind. I lose no sleep over the silencing of Donald Trump, and I believe the insurrectionists should be held responsible for the destruction and death they caused. Yet, revolution and insurrection seem inevitable in society to make radical change in the government, and this can often be for the betterment of society. The U.S. was founded through revolution. I believe that someone worse that DT will come to power at some point, and if we swing the hammer too hard in the present to try to prevent future insurrections and revolutions, we could very well hurt ourselves in the future should some other Troll rise from the depths.

Should government subversion every be necessary due to tyrannical rule, no doubt the internet would be arguably the most important tool to organize such a revolution.