Unnecessary and deeply concerning bow to the new “king”
Update: position got backed up by an official Proton post on Mastodon, it’s an official Proton statement now. https://mastodon.social/@protonprivacy/113833073219145503
Update 2, plot-twist: they removed this response from Mastodon - seems they realize it exploded into their face!
Not entering in the details of the argument, but are you seriously answering an argument that includes “noticing a change in the last years” with “look at the previous 50 years”? From a purely methodological point of view seems completely illogical to do so.
Not all of us are young people who have no recollection of the history of the Republican party. Pretending that there has been some dramatic shift in the last few years is simply false.
Even more false is stating that Republicans are the party of the common man or that they will be the ones to regulate big tech to fix the issues we are facing.
Pretending you can critique an argument without the knowledge of the past and an unwillingness to discuss the details is something else. Truly some peanut gallery level of nonsense.
It’s not a matter of pretending. The fact that there has been a shift is his/their point. If there is a shift it’s implicit that before the shift the situation was different, hence the absurdity of “consider the last 50 years”. You want to contest the fact that there is been a shift, that’s great. But trying to debate the whole argument with “look at the last 50 years” doesn’t touch their argument at all.
Also, in the context of his tweet “the little guy” are small businesses, not the common men. He clarified this point in a reddit comment somewhere, where he mentions small businesses vs big tech. You can go check it out.
Edit: see https://www.reddit.com/r/ProtonMail/comments/1i2nz9v/on_politics_and_proton_a_message_from_andy/m7hfhdh/
I am not sure what obsession you have with “pretending”, but I was not pretending anything. Arguments can be debated in the method or in the merit. In your case the method seemed to be wrong to me and I stated that. Logically was just inconsequential. This is something that doesn’t depend on the validity of the argument or on my position, it’s just a methodological observation.
You might be right as far as I am concerned, but your argument was absurd nevertheless.
I have already said there was no shift. I will pretend you can follow along. The conservatives have threatened to take away Section 230.
https://www.techdirt.com/2024/11/27/brendan-carr-makes-it-clear-that-hes-eager-to-be-americas-top-censor/
This is because they want social media to stop fact checking and moderating their users so they can spread misinformation aka lies. They don’t want a level playing field. They want to spread misinformation and then control the truth.
So saying they are going to regulate big tech is really just code for threatening them into allowing them to openly lie to people. This is fucking ridiculous.
As typical, conservatives always lean into the small business mantra. That Republicans really care about small business owners whatever the fuck that means. While you won’t discuss the details you are ready to throw some classic Republican propaganda at everyone.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/big-lie-conservative-policies-good-small-business/
Small business ownership has shrunk dramatically in the last 20 years (oops brought up history) and will continue as the too big to fail billionaires and their megacorps suck up all the capital. You would think that a supposed billionaire who only puts his wealthy friends into power would be a red flag for small business or the little guy.
Not for Sudneo though, he thinks billionaires care about him. He probably thinks Muskrat is worried about his well being and free speech rights. Yeah there is a lot of pretending going on for sure.
I also find it bizarre to say the Democrats need to get rid of their “corporate” support. Apparently they are Dinos because every Democrat must be a left wing liberal socialist. Funny that the Republicans don’t need to do this though. Apparently there are no big corporate Republicans, thank God.
Politics don’t exist just in the moment and I find it disturbing you don’t care about history. Perhaps it is a defense mechanism as the Republican party has been on the same trajectory since Reagan. I guess if I was a conservative trying to rewrite reality I would try to discredit or ignore history as well.
Perhaps this is all driven by the thought that this administration is different. I don’t mean to make fun of people but God damn you would have to be a dumb motherfucker to expect anything different in this administration from last time. Stocks up, regulations down, massive fuckups, and politicize everything. I mean if your kink is being governed by clowns maybe it would be great. https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/democrats/2024/10/the-u-s-economy-performs-better-under-democratic-presidents
The truth is a hard pill to swallow I guess and you can see why the Republicans have committed to a war on truth. They simply cannot exist without their lies and the gullible people who believe them.
This of course is exacerbated by the truly awful people we have allowed to control the next administration. I am no fan of Democratic people but the garbage that is the apparatus of our AOTUS is without parallel. I mean you basically have to be a rapist to get a spot in his cabinet.
Ahaha you still didn’t get it. I don’t care if there was a shift or not. That was their argument, not mine. However, whether the shift was there or not, IT IS IMPLICIT in an argument that mentions a shift that before the shift this didn’t apply. Therefore it’s simply useless to counter THAT argument with “you missed the last 50 years”. I didn’t throw any propaganda. I didn’t even make an argument. You are just trying to pidgeonhole me into a stereotypical position to attack me, because apparently you can’t understand what a methodological remark is.
I will skip over the next paragraphs where you talk about " regulating tech" but you talk about free speech and fake news (that has NOTHING to do with antitrust and monopolies). I do that because I agree, but it’s a completely separate conversation, that has no relationship with the context of Andy’s tweet or our discussion.
You are saying this as if this didn’t regularly happen for years though…
I am a communist lol. I would like to see Musk 3 meters under the soil. Please stop making shit up to attack people.
See the beginning of this comment. It’s not about not caring, is that what you think is an argument against THEIR position is actually PART of their argument already. Again, a LOGICAL issue. I don’t care about discussing if dem or rep are pro big or small businesses and in which measure, for me American politics is small flavours of right wing, and I have the fortune of not having to vote there.
Yet another fallacy. have you even read the tweet? Like I do agree with you, but holy shit at the end of a 200 characters sentence the guy said that the antitrust against Google or something was started during the Trump administration. So no, it’s not about being different, I guess, it’s about continuing with what the guy (him, not me) says it’s a trend. You disagree and that’s great, go debate him on why it won’t happen.
Personally, and THIS is my opinion as an outsider, I think this administration is awful and it’s going to fuck up so many things. That said, I will be pleasantly surprised if it will work on breaking some monopolies, even if for all the wrong reasons.