Is Big Tech Too Big? – BBC Click technology bbc

You are viewing this post: Is Big Tech Too Big? – BBC Click technology bbc



เราถามว่าประธานาธิบดี Joe Biden มีความหมายอย่างไรต่ออนาคตของโซเชียลมีเดีย? เราพูดคุยกับบุคคลภายในที่สำคัญจำนวนหนึ่งซึ่งกำลังช่วยกำหนดนโยบายเกี่ยวกับปัญหานี้ เรายังพูดคุยกับคณะกรรมการกำกับดูแลของ Facebook เกี่ยวกับข้อกังวลเรื่องเสรีภาพในการพูดและพูดคุยกับ Jimmy Wales ผู้ร่วมก่อตั้ง Wikipedia เกี่ยวกับสิ่งที่ Wikipedia ต้องสอนผู้อื่นในแง่ของการจัดการสงครามวัฒนธรรมออนไลน์ สมัครสมาชิกที่นี่: ค้นหาเราทางออนไลน์: TWITTER: FACEBOOK: INSTAGRAM:

Images related to the topic technology bbc

Is Big Tech Too Big? - BBC Click
Is Big Tech Too Big? – BBC Click

Search related to the topic Is Big Tech Too Big? – BBC Click

#Big #Tech #Big #BBC #Click
Is Big Tech Too Big? – BBC Click
technology bbc
ดูวิธีการทำเงินออนไลน์ล่าสุดทั้งหมด: ดูเพิ่มเติมที่นี่
ดูวิธีการทำเงินออนไลน์ล่าสุดทั้งหมด: ดูเพิ่มเติมที่นี่

29 thoughts on “Is Big Tech Too Big? – BBC Click technology bbc”

  1. Don't think these social media platform owners should be held responsible for what other people say or publish on their platforms, but do think they should stop locking our accounts for frivolous reasons so they can demand our phone numbers.

    Reply
  2. What I'd like to know is why does twitter say its a private company when people complain but wikipedia says its a public company and in twitters privacy policy one of the first things they say is Twitter is public.
    They are locking peoples accounts for nothing and saying its because people broke their TOS rules, they don't specify which rule, and they demand PII (Personally identifiable information) like the phone number to unlock it.
    But they aren't the only ones who is locking accounts and demanding PII to open it.
    When you file an appeal to unlock your twitter account on the form to fill out it says phone number (optional)
    In twitters Privacy Policy it says you can share other information if you CHOOSE, and one of them is the phone number.
    But then they lock you out and try to force you to give them that information.

    Reply
  3. And the insanity continues.. There seems to be a failure to recognize the obvious these days.. Big Tech, starts out as small tech and cares not for its users and/or their beliefs (nor should it), only for gaining more users or generating more sales, i would have thought this to be obvious, but this discussion tells me that it's not.. Blaming the platform for the mental illness of others is a big swing and a miss, i wont presume to have the answer, but would've hoped for a lil more rational thought and lil less blame game that seems to the societal norm these days..

    Reply
  4. 8 mins into this and so far it looks like the BBC as usual are pushing for censorship of anyone not towing the MSM narrative, notice how they say over and over "Conspiracy Theories".
    Section 230 would be fine if it wasn't for big tech censoring one side and pushing the other, this makes them publisher's not hosters. #defundBBC

    Reply
  5. Hi
    I enjoy your videos alot
    I hope to help you increasing your viewerships. This by subtitle your videos to Arabic and sharing it in many groups for Arab. I have Bachelor's degree in English literature. Don't worry about the charge. I will just charge 5$/2 minutes
    Check the opinion of the last youtuber I dealt with :
    "Thank you for the translation. It really had a great effect, I gained a lot of exposure from it"

    Reply
  6. The worse thing about the algorithm that social media company use is the ambiguity in it , Facebook Google Twitter don't exactly know how machine learning works under the hood.

    Reply
  7. Breaking up big tech for simply allowing people to express their views is censorship, what's next censoring Christian churches for peddling fake beliefs?

    Reply
  8. 230 Is great, just needs to be enforced.

    Dems want to remove it bc they want more censorship but also want control over the tech companies. They let big tech continue to silence one side while allowing the others to roam free, only moving to the punishment of the platforms if big tech censors the wrong ppl.

    This is also, a way to ensure companies such as parler do not even have a chance as they will be deemed as a "domestic terrorist" which is one if not the most ambiguous definitions used by this party and administration.

    Reply
  9. Big Tech have censorship down to a fine art. They won't allow you to discuss certain politics even certain things about Covid but for years they have allowed people to brag on their platforms about force feeding their children industrial bleach to cure Autism, they've allowed people to state they would like to blow passenger planes out of the sky to stop "chem-trailing". I think they are pretty hypocritical.

    Facebook and the like send links to a lot of the stuff they claim to ban. I get "recommended for you" all the time and some of it is crazy stuff.

    Reply
  10. If 230 is removed that is where FB and others will start censorship big time in the name of self protection.
    In Poland, gov is preparing a law that if any social media will delete post, vid or any content can be reported and if not restored will be fined. Only 1 exception there, if content is against the polish law it can be removed and that is the only reason when it can be deleted.

    Reply
  11. Fakebook is Fakebook. 99.9999999999% of "information" in "social networks" is just fakes, ads and cats.
    But humans are stupid. It seems we have a not-to-be-spoken brain decease which affects human brains. Some some of neuro virus.

    Reply
  12. Very true, the fight is between freedom of speech and misinformation, where do you draw the line? For instance if someone states that they believe the election was rigged, give some “facts” as they believe them to be and it gets shared, now is that freedom of speech or fake news/misinformation?
    I think the pressure needs to be on the big tech companies as much as the sources of the information, which I do feel like the tech companies are trying very hard to monitor and maintain. And I think the wider population needs to chip in and report posts with articles containing and propagating false information, My mother in law believes EVERYTHING she sees on Facebook and shares it, I’m not ashamed to say I am the reason she has had her account suspended because I’ve reported her for sharing fake COVID news stories, and I’ve told her I was one of the people who reports her, as well as trying to show her how to tell an article is fake.

    Reply

Leave a Comment