Government regulation often comes about as a result of failure to self-regulate. Facebook doesn't care about torches and pitchforks, but your Congressional representative does. Now, were FB (or tech companies in general) smart, they'd self-regulate before the citizenry starts digging in the garden shed for implements.
But tech companies, and especially FB lately, aren't smart. And, like the three year olds their maturity reflects, they bitch and moan when the hammer comes down. Well hey, Ayn, I've got an idea: stick a finger to the wind and sort your shit before the Big, Bad Government(tm) comes a-knockin'. Because when they come, shit's going to change and probably not in a way you like. Might as well get out in front of that narrative.
Especially in the south, the only thing they have to do is demonize “them”, wave a bible in one hand and a gun in the other to get re-elected while raising money from corporations.
Neither they nor their constituents vote based on “privacy”.
Completely? No. But when it comes to data and privacy I think it'd be better than today's wild west.
Who would have thought ten years ago so many people would be willingly give companies a live feed video stream of the inside and outside of your house, along with voice recordings of everything?
I trust them ("them" being developed-world democracies; obviously there are more concerns with, say, the Saudis) more than I trust tech to self-regulate.
But private corporations also can’t forceable take away your freedom and your property. If I have the choice between giving the government more power and private companies. I worry a lot more about government power.
Well considering that the worse that corporations can do with data is sell your privacy compared to the worse that the government can do - throw you in jail if you give them too much power. I’d rather not give government more power.
Trump has outright said that he is in favor of jailing journalists for spreading “fake news”. You know if the government passed a law to “protect privacy” they would give themselves an exemption and want a backdoor.
I’m not debating the worse case. I’m going by history of how the FBI acted in the 60s during the Civil Rights Area and how it currently acts with the “War on Terror” and the “War on Drugs”.
Having a government that is actively hostile to minorities - religious, race, nationality, or sexuality only takes a populist leader who speaks toward their prejudices....
If we're going to go historical, we'll have to include company towns (which Facebook is revisiting as a concept, incidentally) and debt slavery, the Pinkertons machine gunning strikers...
It isn’t “historical” what is happening today in Gitmo, being able to be locked up without a trial if you are deemed a “terrorist”, or secret warrants.
