wacka i think not... to much debate and opinions crossing the pond

fuck, investing in infrastructure in india might a better investment than changes this drastic to their system.

ppl became restless

@wacka no, socialist just don't understand that business are not made of free money (just like they don't understand the people they tax are not a piggy bank either), and that changes cost money. both for the government and companies.

its opposite acctually... repressing new players more likely... policy, platforms, media etc

global players established... no need for new distruptive patterens to appear i guess

my conspiracy theory hat 😉

however, given how potentially far reaching, it could put most internet sites out of business. which could, in theory, result in pressures from all over the world to repeal their policy.

also could lead to some sites boycotting the EU.

proactivity is always better than reacting... as now.... if you are proactive you prepare all that necessary for your idea... others can only be cought offguard and hastly react + not forsee all consequencess

i wonder what the potential for international fallout might be.

i mean, with GDPR, most people were more or less fine with it. But fair use? that is controversial. People are always pushing that boundary

and the US failing media?

anyway internet infuencers should talk about it since they are the ones under attack the most.... others will survive... that is why there is silence about it

well private buisness can do what they like in US

so if forced somewhere else...

and it benefits main actors in US also

and risk UK actors uploading using VPNs or Spoofing to get around UK law?

this entire act is to hold the hosts of the information, not the uploaders, liable

if they allow anything with a UK copyright to be uploaded, they are fucked

it will be implemented accross internet... no matter what... wait.. wil find some articles about this...

you just said they can do what they like in the US, yet admit they wont

i'm agreeing here

but the US failing media don't have the money to get around this stuff and in youtube/facebook/twitter/google add these filters, they will have major problems.

can't find rly good reference to this discusion but I found this article instead that might help in the future for posting without platforms:

https://medium.com/read-write-participate/internet-filtering-is-obsolete-in-a-decentralized-web-bf570b05fce1

oh and you are right.. fb didn't implement gdpr to all users:

Having said it would follow GDPR “in spirit”, Facebook’s actions tell a different story. On Wednesday Reuters reported that the company would change its terms of service so that its 1.5 billion non-European users would no longer be covered by the privacy law. Until now, all users outside of the US and Canada have been governed by terms of service agreed with the company’s international headquarters in Ireland. Since any user data processed in Ireland will soon fall under GDPR, Facebook is changing the agreement so users in Africa, Asia, Australia and Latin America are governed by more lenient US privacy laws.

Where it needs to comply with GDPR, Facebook seems to have focused its efforts on getting user consent for its data collection practices () rather than reducing the data it collects. It has developed a sequence of consent requests that explicitly outline how each type of data will be used. However, as the company has designed these requests in a way that makes it harder to opt out than opt in.

okay, so then all people in the EU need to do is use Tor

are you 100% sure yt will not implement filters for it all over the platform? It is under copyright disguise

apparently there are conservatives on roseannes side... all Im seeing is condemnation from everyone but ok https://twitter.com/JarrettHill/status/1001530006231597056?s=20

he really gotcha'd that strawman

is it ok to not give a fuck because roseanne is annoying and it was a shitty sitcom?

its about free speech and racism debate... when you cross the line I guess.... I am from EU and am allowed to say my friends that are monkeys.. but I guess If one would be black american it would be insulting... since history... it was insulting to aristocrates when darwin said it first also lol ... point of view ... but context matter ... also... to you americans: How much % black to be considered black?

she was allowed to say it, but even free speech doesn't protect you from repercussions.

She is an idiot and is annoying, but people liked her show apparently. i think this is just a chance for another network to steal it

So CBD is banned, but YouTube only cracks down on creators who post videos that include ads for CBD companies? No concerns about those, some with tons of subscribers, who discuss at length the benefits of CBD?

Mhmm. we'll see if Fox picks it up and if some of the bleeding hearts on that show want to continue with that network.

there is a difference between selling something, and discussing it

Huh, that's not considered promoting it?

probably depends. i mean, youtube is not known to enforce things equally.