The bill, sponsored by Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), would create a new agency called the Digital Consumer Protection Commission that would be empowered to go after giant tech firms for a slew of anti-competitive behaviors and failing to protect consumer privacy.

  • RemembertheApollo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Pointless unless:

    The agency has authority

    The agency can enforce that authority

    The agency can levy fines and other deterrents significant enough to make tech companies fear #1 and #2.

    Otherwise it’s just another agency that will face regulatory capture and dole out slaps on the wrist that Big Tech can effectively ignore.

  • elscallr@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t trust a bunch of crusty trust fund relics to regulate anything. You have to actually understand the technology to not make an absolute shit show of it, and they don’t.

    • admiralteal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The alternative is trusting a bunch of billionaire tech sharks to police themselves swimming with us seals.

      I empathize with your sentiment, but what’s the alternative?

      Seems like Big Tech wins no matter what happens. One way you have regulatory capture, the other you have private regulatory.

      • HarkMahlberg@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Vote out the crusty relics, promote candidates that actually understand tech or are willing to listen to people who do. Even if you don’t believe the crusty relics can be voted out, they cannot live forever. Eventually they must be replaced.

        • admiralteal@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I mean, is Warren now among the crusty relics who don’t understand technology? That’s the implication here.

          If you read the article, it sounds like a bunch of very sound and reasonable first steps being outlined. Seems like this is being torpedoed without a second thought based on pretty flimsy reasoning.

          If the concern is they won’t go far enough… the counterfactual is doing nothing.

          • HarkMahlberg@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I probably wasn’t being fair to Warren by using OP’s words (crusty relics). I trust her far more than I trust most politicians, but I don’t trust Lindsey Graham at all, or any other Republican for that matter. “Bipartisan” bills like this include the likes of SOPA, PIPA, COPPA, and I’ve mailed my senator to protest them all.

            Around the world, people look at the US parties and don’t see “left wing and right wing,” they see “right wing and lunacy.” Ultimately I want more regulation of big tech, I want to see the busting up of the AAAMM monopolies, but the political environment that would create that kind of effective, authoritative, savvy regulator… well, we don’t live in that environment. So until our system and parties resemble the EU’s, these kinds of bills are kneecapped by bribery disguised as political donations (a la Citizens United), regulatory capture, and the other Reagan-era failed policies that have brought us to our current position.

            Like yeah, this part is great, especially considering Google’s WEI proposal:

            Specifically, the commission would ban the largest tech companies like Amazon, Meta, and Google from providing favorable treatment to their own products on their platforms to those of their competitors, otherwise called “self-preferencing.” Along with the Federal Trade Commission and Justice Department, it would also be allowed to authorize merger proposals and review past ones retroactively.

            I’ll take what I can get for now, but the US has a very long way to go.

          • Bipta@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            She basically wants to end cryptocurrency… Crusty? No. Understand technology though? Also no.

            • admiralteal@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Well yeah, she’s a huge advocate for consumer financial protections and crypto has the potential to delete all forms of consumer protections in financial transactions. This isn’t a surprising position for her to take and it doesn’t imply a lack of understanding of the tech. Just tells you that her politics don’t line up well with the Venn diagram of anarchists and libertarians that think there’s no downsides to crypto.

              • Bipta@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I don’t know that that’s a fair assessment. She seems interested in ending cryptocurrency, not ensuring it’s used responsibly.

  • ganksy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    While well intentioned, in the hands of the right the agency could what the supreme court is doing now for big tech.

        • DarraignTheSane@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          “Corporate self governance” doesn’t exist. Whatever fucks the consumer for more profit is the only rule they follow.

          • Aatube@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’d prefer the current state of affairs than the tech industry getting restricted by a budge SCOTUS. It doesn’t exist, but it’s still better than the other, since the SCOTUS people probably benefit corporate anyways

    • HarkMahlberg@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      The answer to a dysfunctional government is not dismantling government, but replacing it with a functional government.

    • snooggums@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      So, look at the failures of the SEC and avoid those problems.

      What will happen is the same as the SEC, but the opportunity to learn exists.