Are we accidentally League of Shadows??

Are we accidentally League of Shadows??

"tech companies like Google and Facebook have become too big and may need to be broken up."
breitbart.com/tech/2017/07/28/report-steve-bannon-wants-google-facebook-to-be-regulated-like-utilities/

Other urls found in this thread:

thedailybeast.com/steve-bannon-trumps-top-guy-told-me-he-was-a-leninist
archive.is/9mxkt
arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/08/mobile-broadband-cant-replace-fast-home-internet-americans-tell-fcc/
mises.org/library/myth-natural-monopoly
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

your daily reminder

normally I'd be against this slippery slope but since jewgle and faceberg are owned and operated by commie kikes I'll support their power being stolen by Trump. Nowhere to go but up.

good

This is precisely why "net neutrality" is a meme and two sides of the same corporate political agenda.

The internet as a service should be declared common carriers.

Millions of people rely on nosebook and twitter every day in order to commuicate. They are large enough to be recognized as a form of "common carrier", and should not be allowed to regulate the content of the speech which is carried across their networks. Again, "common carrier" is the legal concept to look at here.

Oy vey how could you possibly want to regulate these monopolies that, like electricity and water, people depend on in their everyday lives? Anti-Semitic much? The ADL will hear about that $6,000,000 you owe me to compensate for emotional trauma.

so they're actually going to do 1 good thing while in office?
that's nice

Based.

This. There is no absolute right or wrong way with this whole NN bullshit. I wish that I could be against this kind of thing because I would truly love to let MUH FREE MARKET "do the fixing" for us. But (((they))) are in total and complete control of the corporate business and corporate media and communication world and this would only serve to undermine their behind the scenes power.

Die bannon.
Neo con shit.

>people will die if they don't have a search engine
>people will die if they don't have their own personal billboard

I was thinking about that, and its really odd.
You'd think that government having the ability to shape the publics opinion is the worst possible thing, but the big companies currently prove that they are a bigger threat.

Before this whole Google shit you'd think that they just do whatever makes them the most money, which is absolutely logical for a company like that, but now its absolutely clear that they are trying to force political viewpoints onto people.


The only confusing part here is why a company that should aim to make cash somehow goes for anti capitalist pro communist approaches.

JUDEN RAUS

how do you figure Bannon a neo-con?

this would be a total flip flop for Bannon. Who is the source?

Bannon is a communist.
thedailybeast.com/steve-bannon-trumps-top-guy-told-me-he-was-a-leninist

Let's archive
archive.is/9mxkt

>people will be unable to do their jobs without a search engine and email
>people rely on social media to keep in contact with friends, family and business contacts now

Society has moved on, dumdum. Think about cars. Optional at first, a luxury for the wealthy... but now compulsory if you want to get anywhere professionally (in most of America and plenty of other places anyway). Internet & mobile phones are having a similar effect now, a fun luxury at first but now the economy has changed and without them - and in practice the associated platforms - it's very difficult (and you need to be highly specialized and well positioned) to get by without it.

I hope it's true but if it is why hasn't the Trump administration purged the FBI who are filled with American hating commies?

The Justice department is under executive control it should be extremely easy. The FBI are harassing, silencing, and intimidating Trump supporters for not agreeing with their outdated hippy view of the world. Subhumans have proven they are murderous rapacious savages no matter how much money and fake love you throw at them.

Welp free market fags, do you agree with daddy Bannon?

He has a point.

I can see that, but it's not like the sudden and unmendable revocation of Google and Facebook means people will see their life come to an end.
Gmail? Plethora of email alternatives that are already in use.
Searching? Same.
Maps + navigation? Same.
Social media? Same.

People will migrate just like they always have. Just like they did with MySpace.

Right. So you admit people depend on these services now. As they do electricity and running water. Therefore it's fair to want to treat them as public utilities and prevent them from becoming monopolies or cartels.

>people will die without electricity
This is how retarded you sound

As a monopoly google, facebook and amazon should be broken up into smaller competing companies.

>The only industry America still ranks first in the world will now be run like an American airport.

Please kim. Do it.

>power goes out
>no more fridge
>no more cellular network
>no more internet in general
>no more TV
>no more radio broadcasts
>fucked

>Google disappears from the face of the Earth never to return again
>use another search engine
>use another email application
>use one of the other 6 million browsers out there
>an alternative to Maps and Earth are created and open-source maps see increased use

>power out = fucked
>Google out = easy replacement
Who's the fucking mong here Giuseppe, you or your ass?

People have adapted to those services, but unlike electricity, having to lose a different search engine and having to migrate to a different personal billboard to post your shit on is not going to kill anybody.
People will adapt and use replacements, and nobody's gonna lose their job, nobody's gonna lose communication, and no fucking body's gonna die.
Just look at what you're saying here. For fuck's sake.

No, wait. We'll still have food and weapons for export. One will be too expensive for us to afford without state assistance, the other will get our names put on a surveillance list for the psychologically impaired.
>Food
>Guns
>Everything else is a rundown piece of shit, alcoholism, drug epidemics, ethnic cleansing of historical landmarks and ideas

He's right, but I don't think anyone will end up listening to him. Nobody should have as much power as these two companies combined. We're now seeing what it means; say too many no-no opinions = get banned, get de-monetized, get shut out of the only two mainstream social medias.

I have never tried or never will be some contrarian e-celeb free speech superhero. But I see many who try to be that and they get silenced or sanctioned. Then they have no audience anywhere.

arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/08/mobile-broadband-cant-replace-fast-home-internet-americans-tell-fcc/

Meanwhile, the FCC under the Trump administration believes Americans don't need fast internet.

What an ass backwards administration.

90 years ago:
>"Regulate electricity companies as something the public depends on? What a preposterous idea! Sure, I have a fridge but what's the worst that could happen if the power goes out: I lose my frozen food? I have other food; I'd just have a big frozen food banquet. Probably be fun! I don't NEED to refrigerate my food. And I have lots of candles in the house so who cares if the lights go out, I'll just switch to candles! And we'll do the same at work - even though everyone uses that company's electricity and so do all of our clients. We'll all just buy candles! It's not like I RELY on electricity in my day to day life... well, maybe I do a little bit, but I could get by just fine without it. And lots of people don't even need electricity to get by day to day anyway. Some poor people don't even use it at all! Sure, it would be very inconvenient if the one electricity company that everyone uses with little awareness of alternatives were to stop being able to provide power or decide to start using its monopolistic position to extort us... and I guess we'd all need to switch over and get used to alternative suppliers... it wouldn't cause that much disruption, obviously. And anyway if the power were to go out, it wouldn't kill anybody!"

Lots of people will die without electricity. Hospitals will go back to 1900's, food won't be produced or stored with same efficiency, fuel will have to be rationed because production and distribution suffers..

>Welp free market fags, do you agree with daddy Bannon?
no, because i'm not a faggot who changes his principles whenever it benefits me. you know, like a jew or a natsoc.

>wow, i'm really changing everyone's mind and making the world a better place with this totally original piece. and the capitalist is actually a pig, lol, how hilarious.
nice comic retard.

This

Google monopolized and personalized the market. It's too hard to go back, just like it's too hard to go back full hunting/farming for your own survival

/ourguys/
>Trump
>Bannon
>Miller
>Sessions
>Donald Jr

>regulation
Fuck off bannondorf

>thinks google is the only search engine
>thinks gmail is the only e-mail service
>thinks facebook is the only way to keep in contact with friends, family, business contacts
You millennial subhumans don't even realize that there's shit that's new that can do this, right? And "for business" you need a fucking phone. That's pretty much it. You text people you work with usually through a text app, not a fucking social network, so I don't know where this "facebook" meme came from.

Maybe your Starbucks colleagues like to use Facebook and Snapchat to """"talk business"""", but grown ups don't.

>Bannondemort
>Baurnon
>President Banniolanus Snow

>doesn't get that large numbers of companies use Gmail, store documents in Gmail accounts and Googledocs and communicate with clients exclusively through Google products
>doesn't get that most people are not meticulous about backing stuff up
>doesn't understand the difficulties that would arise if these were to suddenly disappear or terms and conditions dramatically altered
>doesn't understand that Facebook and apps (many of which are owned by Facebook or Google) IS how many people stay in touch these days
>thinks he's way smarter and better informed than he is
>doesn't understand the enormously strong leverage position Google has in the world
>let alone the enormous amount of information regarding you that THEY OWN

>but Google wouldn't actually do anything bad would they
>I mean their motto is "Don't be Evil"
>well, it used to be anyway

Read Kaczynski's manifesto and get back to me.

And I haven't been to Starbucks since Schultz came out with that 10,000 refugees bullshit, faggot.

Ancap retards leave

Bannon is right. He knows who the real enemies are. His loyalties remain true. He knows who his soldiers are. The nameless anons. He will fight for them as he always has. And when called upon, we shall eagerly fight in our strange but effective ways and reciprocate in kind.

The final wars haven't even started yet, anons. The fire rises.

wtf I love accelerationism now

>you have to be a retarded anarchist to dislike government overreach
dumb toothpaste poster.

It's not about NN, it's about Trust Busting.

Goolag is effective a trust, so is Faceberg.
By breaking them up, they even out the playing field for smaller players.

my cat's name is Ra's Al Ghul.

How is regulating monopolies overreaching?

>trust busting
Is this the second coming of teddy?

>Monopoly
>Lists 3 different companies

Here's the thing with all the arguments I see against Bannon wanting to regulate Google/Facebook as utilities. They are all basically "you don't HAVE to use Google or Facebook, you can switch over at any time. So leave them alone. What are you worried about anyway, conspiratard?"

Fact is that even by your own logic, you're wrong: people are often forced to use Google and/or Facebook for various reasons - both professional and social. My employer has a staff email network which is Gmail; all our accounts are Google. We often use Dropbox and Googledocs and so on - just like Debbie Wasserman Schultz. And socially you can stand outside and say "I don't use Facebook" but everyone thinks you're weird not having a Faceberg account - as anyone who doesn't have one knows for a fact. Plus certain job applications and internships require you joining a Facebook group. I know this for a fact. And if you don't join the group, then maybe you're too much of a weirdo for Cohen, Shyster and Bergstein LLC. We're social people here, y'know.

Also the alternatives are inferior platforms in effect: what's the point of a social network that nobody is on? Facebook has no competitors anywhere unless it is literally blocked from the country, as it is in China (and even then all the cool kids use it to show how net savvy they are).

Then you have the fact that it's not about the COMPANIES anyway - you idiots - it's about the SERVICE THEY PROVIDE. As I showed above, even the guys arguing against me admit that these are now essential services in the modern world. So by that logic alone they should be regulated (a bit) as energy and water companies are.
>inb4 richkid libertarian who says all regulation is bad and we shouldn't regulate these companies either

Those of you who would say "lol it's pointless to regulate them, we have alternatives" are a sad example of how modern Western people have been gradually losing touch with the nature of power since the 60s.

Also this

masons murdered capt morgan

It all makes sense now

Let's have a qr

Hell yes

These companies should be taken over by the government

The government has all our data anyway, so what is there to be afraid of?

>you don't HAVE to use Google or Facebook, you can switch over at any time. So leave them alone. What are you worried about anyway, conspiratard?
this is a shitty argument because all of these services collect information on you anyway, even if you don't have an account or use their services at all.

even if you never make a google search in your life, google still has built up a tracking system that will build a profile on you regardless.

if my electricity retailer charges me for "using their power" if i walk into premises and areas that they service with an active electronic device, can they really get away with the excuse that i can just not get charged by staying inside my house for the rest of my life?

communism?

trust busting is one of those things many on the right and the left could get behind, but will never happen because the rich neoliberals on both sides dont want it to

He's not hiding it very well

Monopolies only form from regulation.

>Republicans want Facebook and Google to be regulated Utilities
>Republicans don't want the internet which houses both of those things to be a regulated utility

Nig with question marks cannot be more appropriate here

Yup, I mentioned in another post how much info regarding you that is literally their property. That alone is a reason to trust bust and regulate. There are so many good reasons to do this you can't get them all in 2000 characters.

Google are a very powerful company and they are in the press right now, in conflict with an online movement that we are ground zero of. The shills have been showing up FAST in Google related threads recently. And naturally a Google shill is not going to see any problem with an extremely essential part of the modern world's infrastructure completely dominated by 2 companies.

>Monopolies only form from regulation

Reminder that the rich neoliberals didn't want Trump to win, and didn't want the TPP or The Paris Climate Gibs killed. They're powerful, they're not all powerful.

Ridiculous. Monopolies are a naturally occurring phenomenon in the market.

Bannon is litterally our last hope

I've always supported lightly regulated calitalism you nigger. The free market is an incredibly powerful tool, but you can't let it go totally out of control.

If you have money to regulate you competition you have a clean path.

I see you have Eurocuck flag, and have no idea of the shit that happens in the US.

Imagine if Verizon or any other jew carriers could monitor and censor your phone calls, sell information based on what you were talking about, ban you from using their service for "offensive" speech.

There are alternatives to Google like Yandex.

Just stop using it and chastise people who do ad anti-freedom faggots

>Before this whole Google shit you'd think that they just do whatever makes them the most money, which is absolutely logical for a company like that, but now its absolutely clear that they are trying to force political viewpoints onto people.
Two points. One, the people behind these companies aren't really tied down to any particular company. Even if their company goes down in flames, they will just parachute away to another company. Two, it's a long term game. Sure, blowing money on political astroturfing might not return dividends immediately, but guaranteeing that the electorate will never threaten you in the long-term is a huge gain.

Absolute nonsense dumb meme flag poster.
mises.org/library/myth-natural-monopoly
You cannot name any historical accounts of legitimate monopolies prior to the government sticking their hands in the market.

HOLY FUCK IT'S TRUE

the bear to Teddy's right rubbing it's hands like a greedy jew?

It's not a good comparison because there are plenty of alternative search engines to use, which more or less function the exact same and require little to no effort to "start using".
You're absolutely right about the 90 years ago thing but it's just not a good comparison (maybe it will be in a few years?).

None of those are examples of the free market.

...

Google is a search engine the same way Unilever is a stick of margarine.

Yeah I read a bit more of the thread and have changed my mind now. Completely forgot just how much companies use cloud based shit.

>mises
Yeah, I knew that was coming lol. Market fundamentalists could never into competition. I'll just skip right to the simple axiom that debunks anything you'll have to put forward:

It is always more profitable to be a monopoly than it will be to compete.

No company has ever or will ever need the government to consolidate market share in their favor. Even the use of government through something like regulatory capture is no indication that the government is necessary to monopolize or consolidate the market, it's only an indication of the government being a simpler; easier; or more cost effective way to do it.

Far be it from a competition boom in the 80s and 90s (as was asserted) when the neoliberals took over economic thought, deregulated, and 'got the government out of the way,' it was a well documented M&A frenzy to consolidate market share.

>The more you know~

He's right. Google employees need to be sent to gas chambers.

Ford Pinto and Asian Sweatshops.

I'm retarded. Someone explain to me how you would break up Facebook?

>It is always more profitable to be a monopoly than it will be to compete
Even if this was true there's no feasible way to do so in a competitive market. Maybe you should read the article rather than using your trigger word as an excuse to disregard it.
I won't be responding further unless you make an effort to take your own advice before replying.
>The more you know~

It's kind of amazing seeing all these young people that don't know about what the earlier times of the internet were like. I wonder what'd happen if you handed some of these people a phone book and asked them to find a plumber in their area lol.

I agree with him. Google and Facebook are massive communication entities that are essentially monopolies in their field and have the power to manipulate all of society if they so wished. They need government oversite.

>Even if this was true there's no feasible way to do so in a competitive market
M&A and a host of not-strictly-competitive market behavior? Principally that's how every (non-natural) monopoly formed. Again, Market fundamentalists could never into competition; perfect competition is a pure fantasy cooked up to justify a host of illogical and corporatist-styled policy.

>Maybe you should read the article
No need, I'm actually about done writing an economics book. I've already been well acquainted with the nonsensical, delusional, and ridiculous things market fundamentalists believe. It's a bit difficult to tell whether they're just stupid or malicious.

...

>implying a phone book is hard to use
>not an argument

Intothetrashitgoes.jpeg

They have broken up huge companies before that have been fortunate to be at the forefront of an emerging market. Standard Oil comes to mind as one example.

>three mile island
Tightly regulated by gov.

>Love Canal
Private company did everything in their power to stop school board from buying and using the dump (which was in accordance with regs of the time). Government forced them to sell despite many warnings. Then gov dug up the toxic waste building schools and suburbs.

>Housing Bubble
Government "let's sell houses to everyone with a pulse so the economy will be great" planning.

>Asian sweatshops
Gov allowing offshoring.

>AIG
>Ford Pinto
Don't remember the specifics.

When microsoft was split years ago it was a fraction of the size of google today. Those fuckers are a monopoly. And if goverment has any responsibilities in capitalism, it's breaking up monopolies.