• skisnow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Yeah, having only just switched from GMail to Proton last week my heart sank when I saw “Proton are MAGA”.

    Then I spent three minutes reading up on it and it’s like, the CEO said one thing about policy on regulation of big tech that was critical of the Democrats for not doing enough, and the internet has decided that means he’s MAGA.

    • anachrohack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      He said Republicans are better on tech policy than democrats. Republicans tech policy is motivated entirely by the fact that their racist and conspiratorial views were getting them banned on social media sites from 2015 - 2024

      Conservatives have absolutely zero principles. If they say they want to break up big tech, it’s because they want to control it in some way. They want the platforms to promote speech that’s beneficial to them.

      If you believe that Republicans truly are better for tech policy than democrats, then you either whole-heartedly agree that a group of criminals and wannabe dictators should be able to destroy any business that publishes speech against them, or you are extremely gullible. Either way, why would I want to give you my business?

      • sudneo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Republicans tech policy is motivated entirely by the fact that their racist and conspiratorial views were getting them banned on social media sites from 2015 - 2024

        And i should care because…? Why should I care why republicans wanted to break up tech monopolies, if breaking monopolies is anyway something that I consider a positive change?

        Breaking monopolies give people more choice. More choice (free) leads to hopefully people choosing more privacy conscious tools. More privacy means less data that can be handed over to doge, less data that ICE has to target minorities, etc.

        then you either whole-heartedly agree that a group of criminals and wannabe dictators should be able to destroy any business that publishes speech against them, or you are extremely gullible.

        Those are not the only 2 options. I am instead very happy that they will do the right thing for the wrong reason, and outside those monopolies more people will choose services that republicans have no power over. Moreover, your whole argument assumes someone is in US. I am sympathetic to the people in US, but tech monopolies are a global problem.

        • anachrohack@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Why should I care why republicans wanted to break up tech monopolies, if breaking monopolies is anyway something that I consider a positive change?

          Because they’re not interested in breaking up monopolies; they’re interested in threatening their political enemies with breakup so they can control speech on those platforms. Mark Zuckerberg is kowtowing to Trump now to avoid being broken up.

          You think the Republicans are going to break up tech and create a more diverse online publishing ecosystem that’s harder for any one party to control? No, they’ll crush their enemies and bolster their allies, so we’ll end up with even fewer choices

          • sudneo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            There are less than 10 companies that control almost the entire tech space. What “fewer choices”…?

            Breaking up google would be already enough, which is what the focus was. All your comment sounds very fuzzy to me. Basically the whole antitrust thing is on google, if republicans break it up, great. Which " allies" are they going to bolster?