"Utility-style" regulation, what could possibly go wrong?
Anybody else remember the California brown-outs in 2000 and 2001?
Steve Bannon, President Trump's chief policy strategist who has been dubbed "the Second Most Powerful Man in the World", wants a clampdown on Silicon Valley. Bannon reportedly wants "utility-style" regulation for the giant internet platforms, according to The Intercept. Facebook, Google and Amazon are named in the report. …
if you'd lived in California at the time, 'Grey Out" Davis (and the DemoRats in general) was to blame, for gummint intervention, etc. and obstruction of construction of a sufficient number of power plants and other infrastructure. Gov. Swarzenegger campaigned on un-doing that blockade during the recall, and won. And it worked.
Example: the Moss Landing power plant had been in a state of disrepair for YEARS. Once Gov "Terminator" was in office, that thing was back up and fully operational in a few months (as I recall, it's an oil burning plant). Basically, snip the red tape and let the company get things done, and you'll get PLENTY of electricity. It was _OBVIOUS_ to those who were "there", no matter what Wikipedia might say about it.
(part of the Moss Landing story might have been PRICE CONTROLS for power generators, and allowing certain plants to charge MORE during peak hours, i.e. 'market forces', ALSO helped keep the lights on)
So THAT was the problem: gummint was GETTING IN THE WAY.
Also, please remember, Wikipedia articles are often written by activists the left, re-edited by activists on the left (often in 'edit wars'), and then used as "proof" for the left's agenda. It has an obvious bias. On non-political things it can be VERY helpful, like describing math formulae or internet protocols. On political things (and even history), not so much. It's not even REMOTELY balanced. It's not even REMOTELY fair. Because CONSERVATIVES and LIBERTARIANS don't have enough "free time" (read: paid editors working for media matters with a leftist agenda re-edit things, because they don't have to have REAL jobs) to spend re-re-editing Wikipedia and undo the re-editing (assuming they had time to post/edit in the FIRST place, working hard and living their lives).
Kenneth Lay - convicted on 19 of 28 counts of securities fraud and wire fraud, sentenced to 24 years and 4 months, fined $630 million.
Jeffrey Skilling - convicted of all six counts of securities and wire fraud for which he had been tried, conveniently died of a heart attack before sentencing.
Surely you don't call that gummint interference?
Based on the idea that the Enron-created outages were a genuine sign of a lack of supply, California authorized lots of new plants under da Guvinator. Now there's an electricity surplus, and ratepayers are paying for plants that sit idle -- but power companies keep lobbying to build new ones anyway.
California brownouts nothing to do with regulation or rather, regulators. Everything to do with referdena votes on prop this and that which banned building of new power stations, fixed the price to the consumer and allowed a free moving wholesale market. economic madness but that's direct democracy for you where dumbassess get bombarded with false information and twisted facts by powerful lobbies with deep pockets. remind you of brexit anyone .. another totally idiotic uinnecessary fubar funded by bunch of twisted rick fucks in the guise of populism.
If you stretch the definition to include the self-proclaimed alt-right as a "civilization," then the clash is occurring right now, all over the West. The resurgent Right is a greater threat to Western civilization than anything coming out of the Mideast.
Trump goes to Warsaw and proclaims the supremacy of Western culture, while back at home his budgetary agenda undermines culture in favor of even more expenditure on military supremacy, which the U.S. already has to excess.
The unholy Trinity of Trump, Bannon and Scaramucci threaten to lead the U.S. into a new Dark Age, while our Parliament of Whores lights the way.
"The resurgent Right is a greater threat to Western civilization than anything coming out of the Mideast."
It's a bloodless war. For our freedom. I want mine *BACK* !!! That's what it is. No more, nor less. Why do you think Trump has made a MARINE CORPS GENERAL his new chief of staff???
IT'S A WAR!
/me plays "This is War" by 30 Seconds to Mars
Then why has Twitler FIRED Mooch?
Dans ce pays-ci, il est bon de tuer de temps en temps un amiral pour encourager les autres.
Mooch was hogging the headlines, among other sins. Mooch is by no means out of the picture, merely out of the spotlight. The infamous Corey Lewandowski is still hanging around, too.
Wasn't expecting to agree with Bannon on anything. But of course these are pre-election sound-bites. Whereas it was business as usual for billionaires once Trump took over... Just a different faction of elites klepto'ing away:
....."There’s a relatively obscure agency in the federal government that is engaged in a huge fight... It’s called the Export-Import Bank. And for years, it was a bank that helped finance things that other banks wouldn’t do. And what’s happening over time is that it’s metastasized to be a cheap form of financing to General Electric and to Boeing and to other large corporations. You get this financing from other places if they wanted to, but they’re putting this onto the middle-class taxpayers to support this. ... as an example of the cronyism. General Electric and these major corporations that are in bed with the federal government are not what we’d consider free-enterprise capitalists. We’re backers of entrepreneurial capitalists. They’re not. They’re what we call corporatist. They want to have more and more monopolistic power and they’re doing that kind of convergence with big government. And so the fight here — and that’s why the media’s been very late to this party — but the fight you’re seeing is between entrepreneur capitalism, and the Acton Institute is a tremendous supporter of, and the people like the corporatists that are closer to the people like we think in Beijing and Moscow than they are to the entrepreneurial capitalist spirit of the United States".....
...."What was the feeling on Wall Street when they bailed out the banks? - Here’s how capitalism metastasized, is that all the burdens put on the working-class people who get none of the upside. All of the upside goes to the crony capitalists. The bailouts were absolutely outrageous, and here’s why: It bailed out a group of shareholders and executives who were specifically accountable. The shareholders were accountable for one simple reason: They allowed this to go wrong without changing management. And the management team of this. And we know this now from congressional investigations, we know it from independent investigations, this is not some secret conspiracy. This is kind of in plain sight. In fact, one of the committees in Congress said to the Justice Department 35 executives, I believe, that they should have criminal indictments against — not one of those has ever been followed up on. Because even with the Democrats, right, in power, there’s a sense between the law firms, and the accounting firms, and the investment banks, and their stooges on Capitol Hill, they looked the other way.".....
Someone might want to point that out to the FBI probe concerning alleged Russian influence. After all, if the influence was so important, it might be worth checking if those people were embroiled in that part as well.
I don't MIND TELLING YOU ORL that I am A TRUMPP SUPPORTAH. I voted for HIM (three Tomes ACTUALLY) and I VOTED FOR melanin TWICE by leaving. A Substance OF MINE ON THE BLOT paper..I am WHAT AMORICAA is now. And I THINK STEEVE BENTONE is. GEENIUS LIKE the men with Ponietales WHO WORK AT APP.E. IF HE says fecesboom SHULD BE TEGURGITATED then HE is WRITE. SAME wig TWATTSR as long as TRUMO can SRILL TELL the people of this GRATE NASHUN his POLICY THOIFHTS. THOUGHTS. DONUT. Today I AM NOT nakid but tumorrow I MIGHT BE. Trump and BANTON are like My FALRUTE FAVOURITE KRISPY KREME donuts. SHINY AND slick on the OUTSIDE AND full of wet goodness ON THE IMSIDE THat I would LIKE TO LICK.
What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
"We spent years trying to make intelligent systems" says Prof Simon Williams from the Institute of Studies, but there was much greater demand for stupidity. The natural supply of stupid people couldn't keep up with the demands of millions of internet comment feeds - so we had to invent an automated system.
1) A lot of commentards are apparently unable to recognise satire unless you include "/s" somewhere in the post.
2) Your post seemed like it was written by the love-child of bombastic bob and a man from mars. I shall need bleach to get that image out of my head. Not the image of the love-child (although that is bad enough) but the process that created it.
This is what happens when Bombastic Bob's Adult Supervision leaves him alone at the keyboard for five minutes. His Darker Half takes over and starts posting.
Speaking of which ...
Someone mentioned that the freshly exhumed man-child Scaramucci might be Trump's "id" at the White House. Notwithstanding that Mooch has been blessedly re-inhumed, one's id is usually somewhat concealed in polite company—the implication being that it's got some naughty impulses that should be inhibited. So: does this mean that there is an *even worse* bit of Trump that is still hidden?! How is that even possible?
'Utility Style' regulation isn't the right approach. Google and Facebook aren't required for intarwebs access.
HOWEVER - _SOME_ regulation is warranted. And when I say 'regulation' I'm talking PRIVACY, where the source of the problem is.
There's nothing stopping anyone from asking people directly to advertise something on a web site. So advertisement marketing regulations wouldn't be needed, either. I can ask my friend who owns a web site "hey can you put these ads on your site?" and then pay for them. Nothing stopping this.
Now, with Google and Faceb[ook,itch] dominating the market and providing marketing strategies to make your ads more effective, a lot of people will want those services. For now.
There's nothing stopping anyone from getting into the same business, except maybe a lack of target-market data [which Google and Faceb[ook,itch] have built up for a few years.
So they have a competitive advantage. YET.. the USE of that data might need some regulation, to avoid privacy violations.
Otherwise, let them do what they want. Personally, I see it as Trump doing "Art of the Deal" again. You make a bold statement about what you want to do. The other side fires back. You end up in the middle. And win something.
I don't know who pays attention to Steve Bannon's economic policy opinions, save for Donald J. Trump.
Regulate Google or Facebook as utilities?
It appears that neither Mr. Bannon, nor Mr. Orlowski are aware of the fact that, in the US of A, utilities are regulated at State level, not at Federal level. There is no US Department Of Gas or US Department of Electricity. And the Feds don't read your gas or electricity bill.
There is no US Department Of Social Media, either.
Which makes the whole premise of Mr. Bannon's uttering, and of this article, senseless.
States can't regulate Google or Facebook traffic, as Internet traffic falls under the authority of the FCC. And I don't quite see how the State of Missouri and the State of Kansas - for example - could impose different TCP packet prioritization or transmission/delivery rules. That would be a recipe for complete chaos. We'd end up with 50 different sets of rules. Good luck with the implementation.
Concerned that Facebook knows everything about you? Too late. If that is your primary concern, you shouldn't have signed up for Facebook in the first place. As an adult over 18 years of age, you should have known that nothing is free.
> Fun fact: regulation of interstate commerce is handled by the federal government.
No, it's actually Congress that has the power to regulate interstate commerce. Not the executive branch. Congress has delegated some interstate regulatory powers to the FTC. And neither Congress, nor the FTC regulate utilities.
And how exactly would that apply to Google, or Facebook? Neither of them are selling you anything. And you aren't buying anything from them, because their services are offered free of charge.
Here's another fun fact, 100% unrelated to the premise of this article - just like your comment: bananas change their color to yellow when they are ripe.
>> Fun fact: regulation of interstate commerce is handled by the federal government.
> No, it's actually Congress that has the power to regulate interstate commerce. Not the executive branch. Congress has delegated some interstate regulatory powers to the FTC. And neither Congress, nor the FTC regulate utilities.
The last time I checked the Congress is one branch of the Federal Government. So there’s that. The Congress has the power to pass laws defining a regulatory authority that lies within the limited powers of the federal government that are defined in the Constitution. The executive branch can approve or veto that law. The judiciary can interpret or overturn the law baesd on the Constitution. Once passed, a regulatory authority is established, and as the Constituion tells us, executive authority rests with the executive branch, the executive branch writes and enforces the regulations.
But you probably knew all of that. Right? No??
The OP was right, the Federal Government has the power to regulate interstate commerce.
For Google's and Facebook's fundraising and revolving door with the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton's campaign. I guess turnabout is fair play, considering that the oil and other industries get hammered by the Democrats.
If you are a big company, you have to be smart enough to triangulate somewhat, so you don't end up getting skewered if the opposition party gets into power.
"He'll be out of that circus we call the White House pretty soon."
I think I've cottoned on to Trump's plan. He's implementing Andy Warhol's everybody will be famous for 15 minutes idea. He's gradually revving up the revolving door so that the entire US population will have held a USG post for 15 minutes by the end of his term of office.
The justification for Common Carrier regulations is that it would never make sense to build two or more parallel replicas of physical structures. The "Free Market" is not dynamic enough to build a second railroad into a town when the first railroad owner could just end their overpricing as soon as the second railroad was in place. Rather than letting these common carriers have a natural monopoly we regulate them.
The left has been contending that ISPs have a natural monopoly on providing broadband service, which therefore should be regulated as a common carrier. Perhaps Mr. Bannon has forgotten that the Republican party is against this classification. I think it makes sense, but I can see this as an area of legitimate debate.
I can even construct an argument that the Internet has created a new type of natural monopoly, where the advantages of having over 50% of the market make it impossible for anyone to compete with you to ever get a larger share. The argument is that the value of the data that Amazon/Google/Facebook can gather cannot be replicated.
But whether this creates a monopoly, as opposed to an oligopoly, is still open to debate. In any case there is absolutely no rationale for protecting the ISPs from being regulated as common carriers and then regulating the Google/Facebooks as being common carriers - other tha the political parties they choose to donate to.
Mr Bannon probably doesn't give a shit about the corrupt Old-Right "Republican" swamp party and Trump probably only cares about getting their votes to pass repair legislation, like getting rid of Obama (rip-off) care.
He's probably quite fed up with the very blatant SJW bias and censorship at search and social media providers, including blocking/banning fake fake-news people and sites from accounts/results, and filtering out valid comments which disagree with their BS SJW "narrative" e.g. on the Twitter feed for Trump.
Here's a better idea...
Since Facebook, Google, Amazon, and a number of other virtual internet monopolies are behaving in a manner similar to that which led to Standard Oil Company being broken up into a number of separate and distinct corporate entities, why not do that instead of building ~yet another~ government bureaucracy that will quickly fall behind in its ability to react and respond and then be co-opted by the very entities it is tasked to regulate?
That's a very flattering picture of Bannon. He normally looks like a walking disease.
Which suggests there is some truth to the old saying that character informs features.
Possibly this also explains Trump's trademarked "sphincter" look when he is lying?*
*i.e. Whenever speaking
Google was claimed to have a monopoly on internet ads... until Facebook came along and rapidly expanded their ads business. Now it is a duopoly... unless a third site comes on to the scene which attracts a lot of eyeballs and, therefore, advertising. Microsoft has just awful internet services and they still attract a few billion a year in revenue. How in the world can you have a monopoly or duopoly on advertising? You would need to have control over what people are able to look at.
Long ago,When consumers purchased old style,hardwired landline phones for their houses,the Bell company of which they were under within their regions,didnt mandate who you could correspond with,and whom you couldnt speak to,or tell you that because you bought a phone in one region,it couldnt be used in your region.No charges for incoming calls,or charges for people of which had called your # by mistake.Then the aura of convenience overtook common sense.Suddenly,the "norm"shifted,and now people were being forced to go with an carrier with best signsls,and on an device of which also pretty much mandates what operating system one uses,coupled with what internet browser ,and email services u utilize thats better performing to the phones OS in general..but couldnt get latest updates,nor even latest Os',even if the phone just hit the market.Suddenly,just like everything else surrounding us..consumers rights,were now privliges,and FCC was schmoozed with political lobbyist framing out the if,ands,and buts of how it should be.When we purchase a tv,we expect it to work,no matter if its going to be used for normal,over the air channels,or through a cable//satellite carrier.Apple,Google/Android,Win are not paying our pathetically high cell bills with even more insulting plans,yet have successfully manipulated services around phones being marketed like designer blingbling,with very little choices for the user in the end.Until they can provide a device of which allows users to choose any carrier,any operating system that updates on any phone,on any device,of which can be used anywhere,in any region,or any country right from the palm of our hands...then theres no theory as to having so much control,so little accountability,while giving users less rights and choices of devices of which are defined as legally obtainable&searchable by courts of law.Im not agreeing with The avenues of which Bannon is suggesting,but when u think about how long this market/field has been shoved down our throats,and to this day,the little choice we have as an consumer/user,whether its via mobile,or home neywork,and the gadzillions profitted...we javent come thst far at all.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019